ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2001
The evaluation of two methods to facilitate shared decision making for men considering the prostate-specific antigen test.
Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
53 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 153 citations in OpenAlex.
- Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Decision coaching for people making healthcare decisions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Prostate Cancer Screening Patient Decision Aids: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.American journal of preventive medicine · 2018Pooled it
- Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Trial
- Comparison of Rating Scale, Time Tradeoff, and Conjoint Analysis Methods for Assessment of Preferences in Prostate Cancer.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2019Trial
- Utility of a Referral Letter to Improve Comprehensibility of Cancer Patients in Palliative Care: a Single-Center Study.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2018Trial
- A Randomized Controlled Effectiveness Trial for PSA Screening Decision Support Interventions in Two Primary Care Settings.Journal of general internal medicine · 2015Trial
- Informed decision making about prostate cancer testing in predominantly immigrant black men: a randomized controlled trial.Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine · 2012Trial
- A randomized trial of a computer-tailored decision aid to improve prostate cancer screening decisions: results from the Take the Wheel trial.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2010Trial
- The development of a web- and a print-based decision aid for prostate cancer screening.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2010Trial
- A randomized trial comparing web-based decision aids on prostate cancer knowledge for African-American men.Journal of the National Medical Association · 2008Trial
- Informing men about prostate cancer screening: a randomized controlled trial of patient education materials.Journal of general internal medicine · 2008Trial
- Low-literacy interventions to promote discussion of prostate cancer: a randomized controlled trial.American journal of preventive medicine · 2007Trial
- Who uses decision aids? Subgroup analyses from a randomized controlled effectiveness trial of two prostate cancer screening decision support interventions.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2006Trial
- Preparing African-American men in community primary care practices to decide whether or not to have prostate cancer screening.Journal of the National Medical Association · 2005Trial
- Randomized trial examining the effect of two prostate cancer screening educational interventions on patient knowledge, preferences, and behaviors.Journal of general internal medicine · 2004Trial
- A randomized controlled trial comparing internet and video to facilitate patient education for men considering the prostate specific antigen test.Journal of general internal medicine · 2003Trial
- How physicians approach prostate cancer screening before and after losing a lawsuit.Annals of family medicineTrial
- Patient education for informed decision making about prostate cancer screening: a randomized controlled trial with 1-year follow-up.Annals of family medicineTrial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveCalifornia law (Grant H. Kenyon Prostate Cancer Detection Act) requires physicians to inform all patients older than aged 50 years who receive a prostate examination about the availability of the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test. Physicians are not given guidance on how this information should be presented. We sought to evaluate the effects upon PSA screening rates of informing patients about PSA testing by 2 different techniques.
designFactorial comparison of discussion versus video formats for presenting information about the PSA test.
settingPatients were recruited through the Health Appraisal screening program in the Department for Preventive Medicine, Kaiser Permanente, San Diego, Calif.
participantsMale patients undergoing health appraisal screening participated in 1 of 4 groups providing information about PSA screening: usual care ( n=43), discussion about risks and benefits of PSA ( n=45), shared decision-making video ( n=46), or video plus discussion ( n=42). Participants were sequentially assigned to 1 of the 4 groups.
resultsNo significant differences in demographics or family history was demonstrated between the groups at the time of group assignment. Participants in the intervention groups rated the information as clear, balanced, and fair. There were significant differences in the number of men requesting a PSA test, with the highest rate in the usual care group (97.7%), followed by discussion (82.2%), video (60.0%), and video plus discussion (50.0%).
conclusionProviding information about PSA screening in the form of video or discussion is feasible and significantly alters PSA screening rates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.