Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19918338›Full record

ArticleReviews in urology2009

Screening for Prostate Cancer: A Review of the ERSPC and PLCO Trials.

Elisabeth Eckersberger, Julia Finkelstein, Helen Sadri, Markus Margreiter, Samir S Taneja, Herbert Lepor, Bob Djavan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Reviews in urology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

26 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Expression of RABEX-5 and its clinical significance in prostate cancer.Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR · 2014
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Current status of biomarkers for prostate cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2013
    Review
  20. 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

7 authors.

Elisabeth EckersbergerDepartment of Urology, School of Medicine, New York University New York, NY.
Julia Finkelstein
Helen Sadri
Markus Margreiter
Samir S Taneja
Herbert Lepor
Bob Djavan

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The advent of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing in the early 1980s revolutionized the diagnosis of prostate cancer. As a result of PSA testing, there has been a surge in the number of prostate cancer diagnoses. This review examines the results of 2 recent landmark trials that studied the effect of screening on prostate cancer mortality: the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) and the US-based Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial.

Indexed as

European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC)Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening TrialPSA screening

Identifiers

PMID19918338
PMCPMC2777060

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.