ArticleJournal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education2019
Prostate Cancer Patients' Understanding of the Gleason Scoring System: Implications for Shared Decision-Making.
Article in Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- RNA-Seq Uncovers Association of Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals with Hub Genes and Transcription Factors in Aggressive Prostate Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence Algorithms and Their Current Role in the Identification and Comparison of Gleason Patterns in Prostate Cancer Histopathology: A Comprehensive Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- The prognostic value of Dickkopf-3 (Dkk3), TGFB1 and ECM-1 in prostate cancer.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2024Article
- Article
- Activation of Dendritic Cells Isolated from the Blood of Patients with Prostate Cancer by Ex Vivo Fluid Shear Stress Stimulation.Current protocols · 2023Article
- Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals Influence Hub Genes Associated with Aggressive Prostate Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Immunohistochemical investigation of cytokine expression levels as biomarkers in transrectal ultrasound-guided needle biopsy specimens of prostate adenocarcinoma.Molecular and clinical oncology · 2021Article
- Prostate cancer grading, time to go back to the future.BJU international · 2021Article
- Survey of Radiation Oncologists to Assess Interest and Potential Use of a Genetic Test Predicting Susceptibility for the Development of Toxicities After Prostate Cancer Radiation Therapy.Advances in radiation oncologyArticle
- A Qualitative Study of Men's Experiences Using Navigate: A Localized Prostate Cancer Treatment Decision Aid.MDM policy & practiceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The Gleason scoring system is a key component of a prostate cancer diagnosis, since it indicates disease aggressiveness. It also serves as a risk communication tool that facilitates shared treatment decision-making. However, the system is highly complex and therefore difficult to communicate: factors which have been shown to undermine well-informed and high-quality shared treatment decision-making. To systematically explore prostate cancer patients' understanding of the Gleason scoring system (GSS), we assessed knowledge and perceived importance among men who had completed treatment (N = 50). Patients were administered a survey that assessed patient knowledge and patients' perceived importance of the GSS, as well as demographics, medical factors (e.g., Gleason score at diagnosis), and health literacy. Bivariate analyses were conducted to identify associations with patient knowledge and perceived importance of the GSS. The sample was generally well-educated (48% with a bachelor's degree or higher) and health literate (M = 12.9, SD = 2.2, range = 3-15). Despite this, patient knowledge of the GSS was low (M = 1.8, SD = 1.4, range = 1-4). Patients' understanding of the importance of the GSS was moderate (M = 2.8, SD = 1.0, range = 0-4) and was positively associated with GSS knowledge (p < .01). Additionally, GSS knowledge was negatively associated with years since biopsy (p < .05). Age and health literacy were positively associated with patients' perceived importance of the GSS (p < .05), but not with GSS knowledge. Patient knowledge is thus less than optimal and would benefit from enhanced communication to maximize shared treatment decision-making. Future studies are needed to explore the potential utility of a simplified Gleason grading system and improved patient-provider communication.
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.