ArticleCanadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada2018
Personal prostate-specific antigen screening and treatment choices for localized prostate cancer among expert physicians.
Article in Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionWe aimed to determine the personal practices of urologists, radiation oncologists, and medical oncologists regarding prostate cancer screening and treatment using the physician surrogate method, which seeks to identify acceptable healthcare interventions by ascertaining interventions physicians select for themselves.
methodsA hierarchical, contingent survey was developed through a consensus involving urologists, medical oncologists, and radiation oncologists. It was piloted at the University of Toronto and then circulated to urologists, radiation oncologists, and medical oncologists through professional medical societies in the U.S., Canada, Central and South America, Australia, and New Zealand. The primary outcome was physicians' personal choices regarding prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening and the secondary outcome was treatment selection among those diagnosed with prostate cancer.
resultsA total of 869 respondents provided consent and completed the survey. Of these, there were 719 urologists, 89 radiation oncologists, nine medical oncologists, and 53 undisclosed specialists. Most (784 of 869 respondents; 90%) endorsed past or future screening for themselves (among male physicians) or for relatives (among female physicians). Among urologists and radiation oncologists making prostate cancer treatment decisions, there was a significant correlation between physician specialty and the treatment selected (Phi coefficient=0.61; p=0.001).
conclusionsPhysicians who routinely treat prostate cancer are likely to undertake prostate cancer screening themselves or recommend it for immediate family members. Treatment choice is influenced by the well-recognized specialty bias.
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.