Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28572868›Full record

SynthesisOntario health technology assessment series2017

Prostate Cancer Patient Perspectives on the Use of Information in Treatment Decision-Making: A Systematic Review and Qualitative Meta-synthesis.

Sujane Kandasamy, Ahmad Firas Khalid, Umair Majid, Meredith Vanstone

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Ontario health technology assessment series, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Qualitative studies on men with prostate cancer: a systematic meta-synthesis.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

4 authors.

Sujane KandasamyDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON.
Ahmad Firas KhalidCentre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON.
Umair MajidHealth Research Methodology MSc Program, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON.
Meredith VanstoneCentre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMen with low- to intermediate-risk prostate cancer are typically asked to choose from a variety of treatment options, including active surveillance, radical prostatectomy, or brachytherapy. The Prolaris cell cycle progression test is intended to provide additional information on personal risk status to assist men with prostate cancer in their choice of treatment. To assist with assessing that new technology, this report synthesizes qualitative research on how men with prostate cancer use information to make decisions about treatment options.

methodsWe performed a systematic review and qualitative meta-synthesis to retrieve and synthesize findings across primary qualitative studies that report on patient perspectives during prostate cancer treatment decision-making.

resultsOf 8,610 titles and abstracts reviewed, 29 studies are included in this report. Most men diagnosed with prostate cancer express that their information-seeking pathway extends beyond the medical information received from their health care provider. They access other social resources to attain additional medical information, lived-experience information, and medical administrative information to help support their final treatment decision. Men value privacy, trust, honesty, control, power, organization, and open communication during interactions with their health care providers. They also emphasize the importance of gaining comfort with their treatment choice, having a chance to confirm their health care provider's recommendations (validation of treatment plan), and exercising their preferred level of independence in the treatment decision-making process.

conclusionsAlthough each prostate cancer patient is unique, studies suggest that most patients seek extensive information to help inform their treatment decisions. This may happen before, during, and after the treatment choice is made. Given the amount of information patients may access, it is important that they also establish the trustworthiness of the various types and sources of information. When information conflicts, patients may be unsure about how to proceed. Open collaboration between patients and their health care providers can help patients manage and navigate their concerns so that their values and perspectives are captured in their treatment choices.

Indexed as

Clinical Decision-MakingConsumer Health InformationInformation Seeking BehaviorCell ProliferationClinical Laboratory TechniquesGene ExpressionHumansMalePrognosisProstatic NeoplasmsRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID28572868
PMCPMC5451209

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.