ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2012
A longitudinal study of changes in provider-patient interaction in treatment of localized prostate cancer.
Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Key Determinants Influencing Treatment Decision-Making for and Adherence to Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Review
- Is "Active Surveillance" an Acceptable Alternative?: A Qualitative Study of Couples' Decision Making about Early-Stage, Localized Prostate Cancer.Narrative inquiry in bioethics · 2016Article
- [The HAROW study: an example of outcomes research: a prospective, non-interventional study comparing treatment options in localized prostate cancer].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2014Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWhilst much is known as to the met and unmet communication needs of prostate cancer patients, few studies have been conducted on the changes in communication between provider and patient over time. Therefore, the aim of our study is to examine (a) whether there are changes over time in the quality of psychosocial care in long-term treatment of localized prostate cancer and (b) whether those changes are associated with the treatment decision.
methodsHAROW is a prospective, observational study designed to collect clinical data and patient reported outcomes (PROs) of different treatment options (hormonal therapy, active surveillance, radiation, operation, watchful waiting) for newly diagnosed patients with localized prostate cancer under real conditions. At 6-month intervals, general clinical data, PROs (e.g. quality of life, quality of physician-patient interaction) and individual costs are documented. We analysed data of N = 1,216 patients at the time of initial diagnosis (T1) and after 6 months (T2).
resultsThere is a significant decline in shared decision-making behaviour of physicians for the group of patients undergoing a prostatectomy and for the hormonal therapy group at the time of initial diagnosis and after 6 months. In terms of emotional support by physicians, there is a significant difference between the treatment groups at the time of initial diagnosis with patients undergoing a prostatectomy reporting significantly less support than the hormonal therapy group.
conclusionFuture research from both, the providers' and the patients' perspective, will have to clarify if we can interpret our results as change in the communication behaviour once the treatment decision for prostatectomy or hormonal therapy is made.
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.