ArticleAnnals of family medicine2018
Recent Patterns in Shared Decision Making for Prostate-Specific Antigen Testing in the United States.
Article in Annals of family medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Healthcare System Drivers of Prostate Cancer Disparities: Real-World Evidence, Informatics Pathways, and Policy Translation.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Exploring shared decision-making in prostate cancer screening within primary health care settings in Portugal: a cross-sectional study.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Influence of life expectancy on shared decision-making for prostate cancer screening.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2025Article
- Limited Evidence of Shared Decision Making for Prostate Cancer Screening in Audio-Recorded Primary Care Visits Among Black Men and their Healthcare Providers.Journal of immigrant and minority health · 2024Article
- Shared decision-making before prostate cancer screening decisions.Nature reviews. Urology · 2024Review
- Men's perception of information and descriptions of emotional strain in the diagnostic phase of prostate cancer-a qualitative individual interview study.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2021Article
- Shared decision making and prostate-specific antigen based prostate cancer screening following the 2018 update of USPSTF screening guideline.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2021Article
- Prostate Cancer Incidence 5 Years After US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendations Against Screening.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2021Article
- Urban-Rural Differences in Clinical Characteristics of Prostate Cancer at Initial Diagnosis: A Single-Center Observational Study in Anhui Province, China.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Does shared decision making increase prostate screening uptake in countries with a low prevalence of prostate cancer?African health sciences · 2020Article
- 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
- The Movember Prostate Cancer Landscape Analysis: an assessment of unmet research needs.Nature reviews. Urology · 2020Review
- Preparing African American Men to Make Informed Prostate Cancer Screening Decisions: Development and Pilot Testing of an Interactive Online Decision Aid.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePrevious studies report infrequent use of shared decision making for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing. It is unknown whether this pattern has changed recently considering increased emphasis on shared decision making in prostate cancer screening recommendations. Thus, the objective of this study is to examine recent changes in shared decision making.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study among men aged 50 years and older in the United States using 2010 and 2015 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) data (n = 9,598). Changes in receipt of shared decision making were expressed as adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Analyses were stratified on PSA testing (recent [in the past year] or no testing). Elements of shared decision making assessed included the patient being informed about the advantages only, advantages and disadvantages, and full shared decision making (advantages, disadvantages, and uncertainties).
resultsAmong men with recent PSA testing, 58.5% and 62.6% reported having received ≥1 element of shared decision making in 2010 and 2015, respectively (
conclusionBetween 2010 and 2015, there was no increase in shared decision making among men with recent PSA testing though there was a shift away from only being told about the advantages of PSA testing towards full shared decision making. Many men receiving PSA testing did not receive shared decision making.
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.