ArticleAmerican journal of health promotion : AJHP
Perceptions of Prostate Cancer Screening Controversy and Informed Decision Making: Implications for Development of a Targeted Decision Aid for Unaffected Male First-Degree Relatives.
Article in American journal of health promotion : AJHP. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Men's perspectives of prostate cancer screening: A systematic review of qualitative studies.PloS one · 2017Pooled it
- Informed decision making among first-degree relatives of prostate cancer survivors: a pilot randomized trial.Contemporary clinical trials · 2014Trial
- Protocol paper for an implementation science approach to promoting colorectal cancer screening in Federally Qualified Health Center Clinics: A stepped-wedge, multilevel intervention trial.Contemporary clinical trials · 2026Article
- Predictors of annual prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening among black men: results from an urban community-based prostate cancer screening program.Journal of men's health · 2021Article
- Benefits and Harms of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance in a Prospective Cohort of Patients With Cirrhosis.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2021Article
- CON: Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance: In Need of Higher-Quality Data.The American journal of gastroenterology · 2017Article
- Similar perspectives on prostate cancer screening value and new guidelines across patient demographic and PSA level subgroups: A qualitative study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2017Article
- What's new in screening in 2015?Current opinion in urology · 2016Review
- An Exploration of Precancer and Post-Cancer Diagnosis and Health Communication Among African American Prostate Cancer Survivors and Their Families.American journal of men's healthArticle
- Exploring Prostate Cancer Patients' Interest and Preferences for Receiving Genetic Risk Information About Cancer Aggressiveness.American journal of men's healthArticle
- Patient Communication Preferences for Prostate Cancer Screening Discussions: A Scoping Review.Annals of family medicineArticle
- Feasibility of Recruitment, Perceived Genetic Risk and Susceptibility Beliefs, and Saliva Sample Collection in a Community-Based Prostate Cancer Genetic Risk Pilot Study.American journal of men's healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeFirst-degree relatives (FDRs) of prostate cancer (PC) patients should consider multiple concurrent personal risk factors when engaging in informed decision making (IDM) about PC screening. This study assessed perceptions of IDM recommendations and risk-appropriate strategies for IDM among FDRs of varied race/ethnicity.
designA cross-sectional, qualitative study design was used.
settingStudy setting was a cancer center in southwest Florida.
participantsThe study comprised 44 participants (24 PC patients and 20 unaffected FDRs).
methodFocus groups and individual interviews were conducted and analyzed using content analysis and constant comparison methods.
resultsPatients and FDRs found the PC screening debate and IDM recommendations to be complex and counterintuitive. They overwhelmingly believed screening saves lives and does not have associated harms. There was a strongly expressed need to improve communication between patients and FDRs. A single decision aid that addresses the needs of all FDRs, rather than one separating by race/ethnicity, was recommended as sufficient by study participants. These perspectives guided the development of an innovative decision aid that deconstructs the screening controversy and IDM processes into simpler concepts and provides step-by-step strategies for FDRs to engage in IDM.
conclusionImplementing IDM among FDRs is challenging because the IDM paradigm departs from historical messages promoting routine screening. These contradictions should be recognized and addressed for men to participate effectively in IDM. A randomized pilot study evaluating outcomes of the resulting decision aid is underway.
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.