ArticleNarrative inquiry in bioethics2016
Is "Active Surveillance" an Acceptable Alternative?: A Qualitative Study of Couples' Decision Making about Early-Stage, Localized Prostate Cancer.
Article in Narrative inquiry in bioethics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Caregiving and Shared Decision Making in Breast and Prostate Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Pooled it
- Supportive care needs of men with prostate cancer: A systematic review update.European journal of cancer care · 2022Pooled it
- Factors Influencing Men's Choice of and Adherence to Active Surveillance for Low-risk Prostate Cancer: A Mixed-method Systematic Review.European urology · 2018Pooled it
- Exercise training as a novel primary treatment for localised prostate cancer: a multi-site randomised controlled phase II study.Scientific reports · 2018Trial
- Key Determinants Influencing Treatment Decision-Making for and Adherence to Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Review
- Low-risk prostate lesions: An evidence review to inform discussion on losing the "cancer" label.The Prostate · 2023Review
- Factors that influence treatment decisions: A qualitative study of racially and ethnically diverse patients with low- and very-low risk prostate cancer.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Associations of multimorbidity and patient-reported experiences of care with conservative management among elderly patients with localized prostate cancer.Cancer medicine · 2020Article
- African American Women's Involvement in Promoting Informed Decision-Making for Prostate Cancer Screening Among Their Partners/Spouses.American journal of men's health · 2018Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
The objective of our study was to describe decision making by men and their partners regarding active surveillance (AS) or treatment for early-stage, localized prostate cancer. Fifteen couples were recruited from a cancer center multispecialty clinic, which gave full information about all options, including AS. Data were collected via individual, semi-structured telephone interviews. Most patients were white, non-Hispanic, had private insurance, had completed at least some college, and were aged 49-72 years. Ten chose AS. All partners were female, and couples reported strong marital satisfaction and cohesion. All couples described similar sequences of a highly emotional initial reaction and desire to be rid of the cancer, information seeking, and decision making. The choice of AS was built on a nuanced evaluation of the man's condition in which the couple differentiated prostate cancer from other cancers and early stage from later stages, wanted to avoid/delay side effects, and trusted the AS protocol to identify negative changes in time for successful treatment. Treated couples continued to want immediate treatment to remove the cancer. We concluded that having a partner's support for AS may help a man feel more comfortable with choosing and adhering to AS. Using decision aids that address both a man's and his partner's concerns regarding AS may increase its acceptability. Our research shows that some patients want to and do involve their partners in the decision-making process. Ethical issues are related to the tension between desire for partner involvement and the importance of the patient as autonomous decision-maker. The extended period of decision making, particularly for AS, is also an ethical issue that requires additional support for patients and couples in the making of fully informed choices that includes AS.
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.