Observational studyDer Urologe. Ausg. A2013
[Elderly prostate cancer patients: patient information and shared decision making].
Observational study in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Noninvasive treatment of organ-confined prostate cancer in elderly patients-results of the HAROW study].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2020Article
- [Shared decision-making in prostate cancer patients].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2019Article
- Prostate cancer navigation: initial experience and association with time to care.World journal of urology · 2019Article
- [Health services research in psycho-oncology].Der Nervenarzt · 2015Article
- [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
- [Oncological healthcare research in urology - perspectives].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2014Article
- Locally advanced prostate cancer: optimal therapy in older patients.Drugs & aging · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSome data exist on information and decision-making preferences of elderly prostate cancer patients but little is known about whether communication needs are being met in urological practice. Therefore, it was the aim of this study to examine the information and shared decision-making experiences of prostate cancer patients over 75 years old. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe HAROW (hormonal therapy, active surveillance, radiation, operation and watchful waiting) study is a prospective, observational study designed to collect clinical data and patient reported outcome of different treatment options for patients newly diagnosed 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. Data from 2,482 patients at 4 time points from T0 (initial diagnosis) to T3 (24 months follow-up) were analyzed.
resultsT-tests and χ(2)-tests revealed no significant differences in terms of shared decision-making and information to different treatment options between patients aged over 75 years old and the rest of the sample. Regarding information on self-help groups, rehabilitation options and a second medical opinion, there were significant differences between prostate cancer patient age groups: patients aged over 75 years old received less information on these aspects at all points in time.
conclusionPatients at all ages feel activated by urologists and are informed about different treatment options. However, there is room for improvement in terms of informing especially elderly prostate cancer patients about rehabilitation, second medical opinions and self-help groups. Special information tools and decision aids for prostate cancer patients aged over 75 years old should be developed and implemented to meet the specific information needs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23328778What 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.