ArticlePloS one2017
Association between features of patient-provider discussions and routine prostate-specific antigen testing.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Shared medical decision in prostate cancer screening in primary care: a systematic literature review of current evidence.International urology and nephrology · 2024Pooled it
- Assessment of knowledge, attitude, and practices of Lebanese diabetic patients and their relation to medication adherence and doctor-patient communication: A cross-sectional study.Journal of public health research · 2026Article
- Associations of Content and Context of Communication with Prostate-Specific Antigen Testing.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Association between Patient-Provider Communication and Self-Perceived Mental Health in US Adults with Cancer: Real-World Evidence through Medical Expenditure Panel Survey.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- 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
- Effect of a Prostate Cancer Screening Decision Aid for African-American Men in Primary Care Settings.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2020Article
- Time trends in prostate cancer screening in Swiss primary care (2010 to 2017) - A retrospective study.PloS one · 2019Article
- Are Men Making Informed Decisions According to the Prostate-Specific Antigen Test Guidelines? Analysis of the 2015 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System.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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAlthough the US Preventive Services Task Force recommends against routine prostate cancer screening with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing, specialty organizations support screening via shared decision making between providers and selected patients. While discussions about advantages and disadvantages of testing are a feature of patient-centered care, it is unclear how provider recommendations and the presence of a personal doctor influence testing in the presence of such discussions. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe used the 2013 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System to identify 1,737 male respondents surveyed about their PSA testing decisions. We describe the prevalence of provider recommendations and utilize weighted multivariable logistic regression models to examine the impact of provider recommendations and presence of a personal doctor on routine testing while accounting for patient-provider discussions about advantages and disadvantages.
resultsThe majority (70.4%) of respondents reported some form of discussion with providers about testing and most underwent screening in accordance with provider recommendations. In multivariable analyses, men whose providers had never recommended PSA test were less likely to receive screening [OR 0.03, 95% CI (0.02-0.05)], and patients who did not identify a personal doctor in their care were less likely to undergo testing [OR 0.12, 95% CI (0.04-0.32)]. DISCUSSION: Provider recommendations and having a personal doctor are associated with routine PSA testing. These findings suggest that providers and policymakers should be aware of how the content and context of communication with patients, beyond discussions of risks and benefits, can influence routine PSA testing behaviors.
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.