ArticlePloS one2014
Is anyone listening? Variation in PSA screening among providers for men 75+ before and after United States Preventive Services Task Force recommendations against it: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Physician variation in the de-adoption of ineffective statin and fibrate therapy.Health services research · 2021Article
- Use of the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test in the United States for men age ≥65, 1999-2015: Implications for practice interventions.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2021Article
- Exnovation of Low Value Care: A Decade of Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening Practices.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2019Observational
- Receipt of Cancer Screening Is a Predictor of Life Expectancy.Journal of general internal medicine · 2016Article
- Downstream tests, treatments, and annual direct payments in older men cared for by primary care providers with high or low prostate-specific antigen screening rates using 100 percent Texas U.S. Medicare public insurance claims data: a retrospective cohort study.BMC health services research · 2016Article
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
Abstract
backgroundIn 2008, the United States Preventive Services Task Force recommended against prostate specific antigen (PSA) testing for cancer screening in men age 75+. PURPOSE: To assess PSA screening by primary care physicians (PCPs) before and after recommendations.
methodsIn 2013, this retrospective cohort study analyzed PCPs in Texas with 20+ male patients aged 75+ in both 2007 and 2010, with Parts A and B Medicare. The main outcome was percent of PCP's male patients 75+ who received PSA testing ordered by the PCP in 2007 and 2010, with no recent symptoms suggestive of prostate cancer.
resultsIn both 2007 and 2010, 1,083 PCPs cared for at least 20 men aged 75 or older. The rate of PSA screening ordered by PCPs was 33.2% in 2007 and 30.6% in 2010. In multilevel analyses controlling for patient characteristics, the variation in PSA screening attributable to the PCP (intraclass correlation coefficient) increased from 23% in 2007 to 26% in 2010, p<0.001. Men with PCPs older than age 60 had 9% lower odds (95% CI, 1-17%) in 2010 compared to 2007 of receiving a PSA test, vs. a 4% increase (95% CI, 4% decrease to 12% increase) in men with PCPs aged 50 or younger. Patients with Board Certified PCPs had a 12% lower odds (95% CI, 8% to 16%) from 2007 to 2010, vs. 2% increase (95% CI 11% decrease to 18% increase) in men with PCPs without board certification.
conclusionsThe USPSTF recommendation did not increase consensus among PCPs regarding PSA screening of older men.
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.