ArticleAnnals of family medicine
National evidence on the use of shared decision making in prostate-specific antigen screening.
Article in Annals of family medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
48 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 94 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prostate cancer screening with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2018Pooled it
- Men's perspectives of prostate cancer screening: A systematic review of qualitative studies.PloS one · 2017Pooled it
- Clinician perceptions of a clinical decision support system to reduce cardiovascular risk among prediabetes patients in a predominantly rural healthcare system.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2022Trial
- Personal and family application of cancer prevention practices among physicians.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Exploring shared decision-making in prostate cancer screening within primary health care settings in Portugal: a cross-sectional study.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Lessons from the implementation of the Australian 2016 prostate specific antigen testing clinical practice guidelines: a descriptive study.ANZ journal of surgery · 2025Article
- The association between urinary nitrate and prostate specific antigen without prostatic disease: a cohort study.BMC urology · 2025Article
- Prevalence and determinants of shared decision-making for PSA testing in the United States.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2025Article
- Perspectives and Misconceptions of an Online Adult Male Cohort Regarding Prostate Cancer Screening.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024Article
- Limited Evidence of Shared Decision Making for Prostate Cancer Screening in Audio-Recorded Primary Care Visits Among Black Men and their Healthcare Providers.Journal of immigrant and minority health · 2024Article
- Transcriptome-wide association analysis identifies candidate susceptibility genes for prostate-specific antigen levels in men without prostate cancer.HGG advances · 2024Article
- Prevalence of Shared Decision-making in Prostate Cancer Screening in New York State.Journal of immigrant and minority health · 2023Article
- The Impact of Receipt of Information on Prostate-Specific Antigen Testing on Screening with the Prostate-Specific Antigen Test.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2023Article
- Transcriptome-Wide Association Analysis Identifies Novel Candidate Susceptibility Genes for Prostate-Specific Antigen Levels in Men Without Prostate Cancer.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2023Article
- Prostate Cancer Screening and Young Black Men: Can Early Communication Avoid Later Health Disparities?Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2022Article
- Ethnic Differences Among Black Men in Prostate Cancer Knowledge and Screening: a Mixed-Methods Study.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2022Article
- Number of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening tests in the last five years reported by men in the United States in 2010, 2015, and 2018.Urologic oncology · 2022Article
- Article
- Men's perception of information and descriptions of emotional strain in the diagnostic phase of prostate cancer-a qualitative individual interview study.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2021Article
- Patient Perceptions of Using Clinical Decision Support for Cancer Screening and Prevention: "I wouldn't have thought about getting screened without it."Journal of patient-centered research and reviews · 2021Article
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 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeRecent clinical practice guidelines on prostate cancer screening using the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test (PSA screening) have recommended that clinicians practice shared decision making-a process involving clinician-patient discussion of the pros, cons, and uncertainties of screening. We undertook a study to determine the prevalence of shared decision making in both PSA screening and nonscreening, as well as patient characteristics associated with shared decision making.
methodsA nationally representative sample of 3,427 men aged 50 to 74 years participating in the 2010 National Health Interview Survey responded to questions on the extent of shared decision making (past physician-patient discussion of advantages, disadvantages, and scientific uncertainty associated with PSA screening), PSA screening intensity (tests in past 5 years), and sociodemographic and health-related characteristics.
resultsNearly two-thirds (64.3%) of men reported no past physician-patient discussion of advantages, disadvantages, or scientific uncertainty (no shared decision making); 27.8% reported discussion of 1 to 2 elements only (partial shared decision making); 8.0% reported discussion of all 3 elements (full shared decision making). Nearly one-half (44.2%) reported no PSA screening, 27.8% reported low-intensity (less-than-annual) screening, and 25.1% reported high-intensity (nearly annual) screening. Absence of shared decision making was more prevalent in men who were not screened; 88% (95% CI, 86.2%-90.1%) of nonscreened men reported no shared decision making compared with 39% (95% CI, 35.0%-43.3%) of men undergoing high-intensity screening. Extent of shared decision making was associated with black race, Hispanic ethnicity, higher education, health insurance, and physician recommendation. Screening intensity was associated with older age, higher education, usual source of medical care, and physician recommendation, as well as with partial vs no or full shared decision making.
conclusionsMost US men report little shared decision making in PSA screening, and the lack of shared decision making is more prevalent in nonscreened than in screened men. Screening intensity is greatest with partial shared decision making, and different elements of shared decision making are associated with distinct patient characteristics. Shared decision making needs to be improved in decisions for and against PSA screening.
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.