Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24053213›Full record

ArticleBJU international2014

A national survey of radiation oncologists and urologists on recommendations of prostate-specific antigen screening for prostate cancer.

Simon P Kim, R Jeffrey Karnes, Paul L Nguyen, Jeanette Y Ziegenfuss, R Houston Thompson, Leona C Han, Nilay D Shah, Marc C Smaldone, Cary P Gross, Igor Frank and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJU international, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. All change in the prostate cancer diagnostic pathway.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2020
    Review
  4. Personal prostate-specific antigen screening and treatment choices for localized prostate cancer among expert physicians.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2018
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. 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

13 authors.

Simon P KimYale University School of Medicine, Department of Urology, New Haven, CT, USA; Yale University, Cancer Outcomes, Public Policy, and Effectiveness Research Center (COPPER), New Haven, CT, USA.
R Jeffrey Karnes
Paul L Nguyen
Jeanette Y Ziegenfuss
R Houston Thompson
Leona C Han
Nilay D Shah
Marc C Smaldone
Cary P Gross
Igor Frank
Christopher J Weight
Timothy J Beebe
Jon C Tilburt

Funding

Mayo Clinic Center for Translational Science ActivitiesUL1TR000135 · NCATS · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI KHOSLA, SUNDEEP · 2012 to 2015
$41.2M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000135
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess recommendations for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening in a national survey of radiation oncologists and urologists following the recent USA Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) grade D recommendation.

methodsA random sample of 1366 radiation oncologists and urologists were identified from the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile. From November 2011 to April 2012, a mail survey was sent to query PSA screening recommendations for men at average risk of prostate cancer for the following age groups: 40-49, 50-59, 60-69, 70-74, 75-79 and ≥80 years. Multivariable logistic regression was used to test for differences in PSA-based screening recommendations by physician characteristics.

resultsResponse rates were similar at 52% for radiation oncologists and urologists (P = 0.92). Overall, 51.5% of respondents recommended PSA-based screening for men aged 40-49 years, while nearly all endorsed it for those aged 50-74 years (96.1% for 50-59, 97.3% for 60-69, and 87.7% for 70-74 years). However, screening recommendations decreased to 43.9% and 12.8% for men aged 75-79 and ≥80 years, respectively. On multivariable analysis, urologists were more likely to recommend screening for men aged 40-49 (odds ratio [OR] 3.09; P < 0.001) and 50-59 years (OR 3.81; P = 0.01), but less likely for men aged 75-79 (OR 0.66; P = 0.01) and ≥80 years (OR 0.45; P = 0.002) compared with radiation oncologists.

conclusionWhile radiation oncologists and urologists recommended PSA screening for men aged 50-69 years, there was less agreement about screening for younger (40-49 years old) and older (≥70 years) men at average risk for prostate cancer.

Indexed as

Practice Guidelines as TopicPractice Patterns, Physicians'Radiation OncologyUrologyAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsEarly Detection of CancerHumansMaleMiddle AgedProstate-Specific AntigenProstatic NeoplasmsSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited StatesProstate-Specific Antigenoutcomesprostate cancerprostate-specific antigenscreeningsurvey

Identifiers

PMID24053213
PMCPMC4353641

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.