ArticleJournal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM
Shared decision making in prostate-specific antigen testing with men older than 70 years.
Article in Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Public knowledge of chronic kidney disease evaluated using a validated questionnaire: a cross-sectional study.BMC public health · 2018Article
- Prostate cancer screening decision-making in three states: 2013 behavioral risk factor surveillance system analysis.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2017Article
- Cancer Incidence in Appalachia, 2004-2011.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2016Article
- Pre-screening Discussions and Prostate-Specific Antigen Testing for Prostate Cancer Screening.American journal of preventive medicine · 2015Article
- Opportunities and challenges for the use of large-scale surveys in public health research: a comparison of the assessment of cancer screening behaviors.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2015Review
- Decrease in Prostate Cancer Testing Following the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) Recommendations.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFMArticle
- Prostate-Specific Antigen Testing Initiation and Shared Decision-Making: Findings from the 2000 and 2015 National Health Interview Surveys.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFMArticle
- Multilevel Small Area Estimation of Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening Test in the United States by Age Group: 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFMArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLittle is known about how shared decision making (SDM) is being carried out between older men and their health care providers. Our study aimed to describe the use of SDM key elements and assess their associations with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing among older men.
methodsWe conducted descriptive and logistic regression modeling analyses using the 2005 and 2010 National Health Interview Survey data.
resultsAge-specific prevalence of PSA testing was similar in 2005 and 2010. In 2010, 44.1% of men aged ≥70 years had PSA testing. Only 27.2% (95% confidence interval, 22.2-32.9) of them reported having discussions about both advantages and disadvantages of testing. Multiple regression analyses showed that PSA-based screening was positively associated with discussions of advantages only (P < .001) and with discussions of both advantages and disadvantages (P < .001) compared with no discussion. Discussion of scientific uncertainties was not associated with PSA testing.
conclusionsEfforts are needed to increase physicians' awareness of and adherence to PSA-based screening recommendations. Given that discussions of both advantages and disadvantages increased the uptake of PSA testing and discussion of scientific uncertainties has no effect, additional research about the nature, context, and extent of SDM and about patients' knowledge, values, and preferences regarding PSA-based screening is warranted.
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.