Closing the Lung Cancer Screening Gap in FQHCs with AI-Powered Clinical Decision Support
Dey, A.
Show abstract
BackgroundLung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer-related mortality in the United States, with screening adherence rates below 16% nationally and even lower among underserved populations [1-4]. Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs), which serve over 30 million patients annually, face significant challenges in identifying screening-eligible individuals due to workforce constraints, manual workflows, and limited clinical decision support (CDS) infrastructure [5-7]. ObjectiveWe developed and evaluated an AI-driven, natural language (NLP)-enhanced CDS platform designed to automate lung cancer screening eligibility determination and integrate seamlessly into the workflows of FQHCs. MethodsThe platform combines a deterministic rules engine, encoding the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) 2021 screening criteria, with an NLP pipeline built using SciSpacy and MedSpaCy to extract smoking history details from unstructured clinical notes. Structured and unstructured data were unified using FHIR-compliant APIs to generate actionable screening flags within simulated FQHC workflows. ResultsIn a synthetic cohort modeled on FQHC populations, the platform achieved precision, recall, and F1-scores above 0.90 for eligibility determination and reduced manual chart review workload by 62%. It generated clear, auditable recommendations aligned with Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) coverage policies and Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) quality measures, while identifying additional high-risk patients who may have been missed in manual reviews. ConclusionThis work demonstrates the feasibility of an AI-powered CDS framework for improving lung cancer screening adherence in resource-limited primary care settings. Future development will focus on prospective validation, expansion to other preventive screenings and population health use cases, and integration of explainable AI to enhance clinical trust and scalability.
Matching journals
The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- From months to minutes: creating Hyperion, a novel data management system expediting data insights for oncology research and patient care 95%
- A data management system for precision medicine 94%
- Development and preliminary testing of Health Equity Across the AI Lifecycle (HEAAL): A framework for healthcare delivery organizations to mitigate the risk of AI solutions worsening health inequities 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Low adherence to existing model reporting guidelines by commonly used clinical prediction models 92%
- If you build it, will they use it? Use of a Digital Assistant for Self-Reporting of COVID-19 Rapid Antigen Test Results during Large Nationwide Community Testing Initiative 91%
- Score for Emergency Risk Prediction (SERP): An Interpretable Machine Learning AutoScore–Derived Triage Tool for Predicting Mortality after Emergency Admissions 89%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.