LALubna Ali

Lubna Ali

*This is an algorithmically generated author record based on publicly available information.

Current Organizations / Institutes

The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article


Lubna Ali has a total of 6 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:


Latest Publications

  • Open Access

    “It’s your fault!”: Exploring stigma towards lung cancer in a multicultural society

    by Lubna Ali, Liz Jones, Amanda Au, Stefano Occhipinti

    Stigmatising attitudes towards lung cancer exist across cultures based on societal norms and beliefs. However, there is a notable gap in research on lung cancer stigma within Asian cultures such as Malaysia. Our study explored Malaysian public attitudes towards lung cancer through qualitative semi-structured interviews with 32 participants (11 Malays, 11 Chinese, and 10 Indians). Findings highlighted religious beliefs shaped participants’ perceptions, with some seeing cancer as fate or punishment, while gender norms also influenced how lung cancer was perceived, with societal expectations differing for men and women. Participants primarily attributed lung cancer to internal factors such as smoking, leading to moral judgements of personal responsibility, while some acknowledged genetic predispositions and environmental risks. Our study shows how sociocultural factors, including patriarchal and religious values, influence perceptions of lung cancer, underscoring the importance of culturally sensitive approaches to improve public health outcomes of lung cancer.

  • Lung cancer through patients’ lived experiences: A sociocultural perspective

    by Lubna Ali, Liz Jones, Esther Ong Zhen Mei, Marfu’aH Binti Nik Ezamuddeen, Yogarabindranath Swarna Nantha, Stefano Occhipinti

    Objective: Lung cancer stigma remains a significant yet underexplored challenge, particularly in non‐Western contexts. Our study aimed to explore how sociocultural factors shape the experiences of Malaysian lung cancer patients, with particular attention to stigma. Methods: We conducted a qualitative study using semi‐structured interviews with 15 lung cancer patients at a local public hospital in Malaysia, which were analysed using coding reliability thematic analysis in conjunction with consensual qualitative research. Results: Our analysis showed that participants' narratives centred on the challenges they faced and the coping strategies they employed, which we mapped to the socio‐ecological model to illustrate the sociocultural influences spanning individual, familial, social and systemic levels. At the individual level, smokers felt guilt, while non‐smokers experienced confusion and distress about their diagnosis. Participants reported physical and emotional challenges, finding solace in faith, acceptance and cultural resilience. Within families, feelings of guilt and fear of burdening others constrained disclosure, yet collectivist norms of obligation and care meant that family members still provided crucial emotional and financial support. At the societal level, stigma associating lung cancer with smoking led to blame and isolation for both smokers and non‐smokers. Systemic issues such as diagnostic delays, poor health care communication and financial burdens compounded these challenges. Conclusion: Our study highlights how sociocultural values, stigma and systemic barriers are deeply intertwined in shaping lung cancer experiences in Malaysia. Interventions should be designed with sensitivity to religious beliefs, filial obligations and norms of emotional restraint while addressing stigma alongside health care barriers.