Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29209755›Full record

ArticleDer Urologe. Ausg. A2018

[Evaluation of a prostate cancer E‑health tutorial : Development and testing of the website prostata-information.ch].

R Schaffert, U Dahinden, T Hess, A Bänziger, P Kuntschik, F Odoni, P Spörri, R T Strebel, J Kamradt, G Tenti and 5 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
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

15 authors.

R SchaffertInstitut für Gesundheitswissenschaften, Departement Gesundheit, Zürcher Hochschule für Angewandte Wissenschaften, Technikumstraße 81, 8401, Winterthur, Schweiz. rene.schaffert@zhaw.ch.
U DahindenDepartement für Angewandte Zukunftstechnologien, HTW Chur, Chur, Schweiz.
T HessDepartement für Angewandte Zukunftstechnologien, HTW Chur, Chur, Schweiz.
A BänzigerInstitut für Gesundheitswissenschaften, Departement Gesundheit, Zürcher Hochschule für Angewandte Wissenschaften, Technikumstraße 81, 8401, Winterthur, Schweiz.
P KuntschikDepartement für Angewandte Zukunftstechnologien, HTW Chur, Chur, Schweiz.
F OdoniDepartement für Angewandte Zukunftstechnologien, HTW Chur, Chur, Schweiz.
P SpörriUrologisches Kompetenzzentrum soH, Kantonsspital Olten, Olten, Schweiz.
R T StrebelUrologie, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur, Schweiz.
J KamradtZentrum für Urologie und Nephrologie Bern, Bern, Schweiz.
G TentiUrologische Klinik, Kantonsspital Münsterlingen, Münsterlingen, Schweiz.
A MatteiKlinik für Urologie, Luzerner Kantonsspital, Luzern, Schweiz.
M MüntenerUrologische Klinik, , Stadtspital Triemli Zürich, Zürich, Schweiz.
S SuboticUrologische Universitätsklinik Basel, Kantonsspital Baselland, Liestal, Schweiz.
H-P SchmidKlinik für Urologie, Kantonsspital St.Gallen, St.Gallen, Schweiz.
P RüeschInstitut für Gesundheitswissenschaften, Departement Gesundheit, Zürcher Hochschule für Angewandte Wissenschaften, Technikumstraße 81, 8401, Winterthur, Schweiz.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDue to the multitude of therapy options, the treatment decision after diagnosis of localized prostate cancer is challenging. Compared to printed booklets, web-based information technology offers more possibilities to tailor information to patients' individual needs.

objectivesTo support the decision-making process as well as the communication with patients, we developed an online tutorial in a systematic process in the German-speaking part of Switzerland and then tested it in a pilot study. The study investigated users' satisfaction, the coverage of information needs, the preparation for decision making, and the subjective quality of the decision. MATERIALS AND

methodsBased on already existing information material, the online tutorial was developed in an iterative process using focus groups with patients and urologists. For the following evaluation in eight clinics a total of 87 patients were invited to access the platform and participate in the study. Of these patients, 56 used the tutorial and 48 answered both surveys (the first one 4 weeks after the first login and the second one 3 months after treatment decision). The surveys used the Preparation for Decision Making Scale (PDMS), the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS), and the Decisional Regret Scale (DRS). RESULTS AND

conclusionSatisfaction with the tutorial is very high among patients with newly diagnosed localized prostate cancer. Users find their information needs sufficiently covered. Three months after the decision they felt that they were well prepared for the decision making (mean PDMS 75, standard deviation [SD] 23), they had low decisional conflict (mean DCS 9.6, SD 11), and almost no decisional regret (mean DRS 6.4, SD 9.6). Based on these findings, further use of the tutorial can be recommended.

Indexed as

Decision MakingPatient ParticipationTelemedicineCommunicationDecision Support TechniquesHumansMalePatient Education as TopicPilot ProjectsProstatic NeoplasmsSwitzerlandDecision makingHealth service researchInternetPatient educationProstate cancer

Identifiers

PMID29209755

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.