Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18421460›Full record

Trial reportWorld journal of urology2008

Does educational printed material manage to change compliance with prostate cancer screening?

Konstantinos Stamatiou, Andreas Skolarikos, Ioannis Heretis, Vaios Papadimitriou, Alevizos Alevizos, Georgios Ilias, Vasilissa Karanasiou, Anargiros Mariolis, Frank Sofras

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in World journal of urology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Screening for prostate cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Baseline Attitudes About Prostate Cancer Screening Moderate the Impact of Decision Aids on Screening Rates.Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine · 2015
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Konstantinos StamatiouOutpatient Department, General Hospital of Thebes, Thebes, Greece. stamatiouk@yahoo.com
Andreas Skolarikos
Ioannis Heretis
Vaios Papadimitriou
Alevizos Alevizos
Georgios Ilias
Vasilissa Karanasiou
Anargiros Mariolis
Frank Sofras
University of Crete · GRGeneral Hospital of Attica · GRGeneral Hospital of Drama · GRNational and Kapodistrian University of Athens · GR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

aimThe effects of printed educational material on cancer screening in women (Pap test and mammography) are well documented and confirmed by several studies. The aim of our study was to evaluate the impact of similar printed educational material on prostate cancer screening by PSA and DRE. MATERIAL AND

methodsThousand five hundred men aged between 50 and 86 years of age, who attended our institutions for various medical conditions except prostate-related conditions, were randomly assigned to two study groups. Men in the informed group, received an educational leaflet with simple, general information on prostate cancer screening methods given by their physician along with treatment and other regular recommendations, while men in the non-informed group, were only informed by their physician in the examination room during an interview.

resultsAfter 24 months, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of DRE screening. The percentages of men who were actually screened by DRE were 4 and 5% in the informed and non-informed groups, respectively, while the difference in the percentages of PSA screening was of statistical significance, with 31% of men screened in the non-informed group as compared to 93% of men screened in the informational leaflet group.

conclusionsA single, one-shift distribution of printed educational material on prostate cancer screening, changed their attitude regarding prostate cancer screening only in favour of PSA testing, while did not manage to change the DRE acceptance behavior. However, since the combination of the two tests is more sensitive for diagnosis than either one alone, there is a need of introducing intervention strategies, in the efforts of ameliorating the prostate cancer screening behavior.

Indexed as

PamphletsPatient ComplianceAgedAged, 80 and overDigital Rectal ExaminationHealth BehaviorHumansMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPatient Education as TopicProstate-Specific AntigenProstatic NeoplasmsSurveys and QuestionnairesProstate-Specific Antigen

Identifiers

PMID18421460
OpenAlexW1986433662

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.