ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2003
Physician perspectives on the importance of facts men ought to know about prostate-specific antigen testing.
Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Delivering the unexpected-Information needs for PSA screening from Men's perspective: A qualitative study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021Article
- Patient-Provider Communication About Prostate Cancer Screening and Treatment: New Evidence From the Health Information National Trends Survey.American journal of men's health · 2017Article
- Health literacy-listening skill and patient questions following cancer prevention and screening discussions.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2016Article
- Physicians' attitudes about shared decision making for prostate cancer screening.Family medicine · 2011Article
- Patient-centered discussions about prostate cancer screening: a real-world approach.Annals of internal medicine · 2010Article
- A structured implicit abstraction method to evaluate whether content of counseling before prostate cancer screening is consistent with recommendations by experts.Patient education and counseling · 2009Article
- Screening in the dark: ethical considerations of providing screening tests to individuals when evidence is insufficient to support screening populations.The American journal of bioethics : AJOB · 2009Article
- Family physicians' perceptions, beliefs, and attitudes regarding information sharing with prostate cancer patients throughout the course of the disease.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2008Article
- Physician-patient discussions about prostate-specific antigen test use among African-American men.Journal of the National Medical Association · 2006Article
- Brief report: physicians and their personal prostate cancer-screening practices with prostate-specific antigen. A national survey.Journal of general internal medicine · 2006Article
- Prostate and colon cancer screening messages in popular magazines.Journal of general internal medicine · 2004Article
- Patient-provider communication in cancer screening.Journal of general internal medicine · 2003Article
- Virtual physicians, health systems, and the healing relationship.Journal of general internal medicine · 2003Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo determine physicians' rating of the importance of key facts men ought to know about prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening and whether there are differences by specialty.
participantsA nationwide random sample of internists, family physicians, and urologists stratified by physician specialty from The Official ABMS Directory of Board-Certified Medical Specialists 2000 Edition. MEASUREMENTS: Internists (N = 139), family physicians (N = 160), and urologists (N = 151) were asked to rate how important it is for men to know 17 facts about PSA screening using a 5-point Likert scale. MAIN
resultsOf 769 eligible physicians, 450 responded, for an overall response rate of 59%. Urologists and nonurologists differed in rating how important it was for men to know 9 of the 17 key facts. Eight of the nine statements that urologists and nonurologists disagreed upon concerned facts reflecting uncertainty. Nonurologists were more likely than urologists to rate facts reflecting uncertainty as highly important for men to know. These included statements about prostate cancer risk, screening with PSA, and treatment.
conclusionsDespite professional guidelines supporting informed decision making, the importance of facts men ought to know about PSA testing differ by physician specialty. Systematic differences may reflect differences in professional guidelines about PSA testing.
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.