Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29649921›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of men's health2018

Prostate Cancer Information Available in Health-Care Provider Offices: An Analysis of Content, Readability, and Cultural Sensitivity.

Seul Ki Choi, Jessica S Seel, Brooks Yelton, Susan E Steck, Douglas P McCormick, Johnny Payne, Anthony Minter, Elizabeth K Deutchki, James R Hébert, Daniela B Friedman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of men's health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Implementing Community-Based Prostate Cancer Education in Rural South Carolina: a Collaborative Approach Through a Statewide Cancer Alliance.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2022
    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

10 authors.

Seul Ki Choi1 Department of Health Promotion, Education, and Behavior, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3330-3652
Jessica S Seel2 Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA.
Brooks Yelton2 Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA.
Susan E Steck3 Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA.
Douglas P McCormick4 AID Upstate, Greenville, SC, USA.
Johnny Payne5 UsTOO Greenville and Upstate Prostate Cancer Alliance, Easley, USA.
Anthony Minter6 USToo Columbia and ZERO Prostate Cancer, Columbia, SC, USA.
Elizabeth K Deutchki7 Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA.
James R Hébert2 Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA.
Daniela B Friedman1 Department of Health Promotion, Education, and Behavior, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA.

Funding

ACL HHS U48DP005000NCCDPHP CDC HHS U48 DP005000
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prostate cancer (PrCA) is the most common cancer affecting men in the United States, and African American men have the highest incidence among men in the United States. Little is known about the PrCA-related educational materials being provided to patients in health-care settings. Content, readability, and cultural sensitivity of materials available in providers' practices in South Carolina were examined. A total of 44 educational materials about PrCA and associated sexual dysfunction was collected from 16 general and specialty practices. The content of the materials was coded, and cultural sensitivity was assessed using the Cultural Sensitivity Assessment Tool. Flesch Reading Ease, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, and the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook were used to assess readability. Communication with health-care providers (52.3%), side effects of PrCA treatment (40.9%), sexual dysfunction and its treatment (38.6%), and treatment options (34.1%) were frequently presented. All materials had acceptable cultural sensitivity scores; however, 2.3% and 15.9% of materials demonstrated unacceptable cultural sensitivity regarding format and visual messages, respectively. Readability of the materials varied. More than half of the materials were written above a high-school reading level. PrCA-related materials available in health-care practices may not meet patients' needs regarding content, cultural sensitivity, and readability. A wide range of educational materials that address various aspects of PrCA, including treatment options and side effects, should be presented in plain language and be culturally sensitive.

Indexed as

AgedBlack or African AmericanComprehensionCross-Sectional StudiesCultural CharacteristicsHealth LiteracyHealth PersonnelHumansInformation DisseminationMaleMiddle AgedPatient Education as TopicProstatic NeoplasmsRisk AssessmentSouth CarolinaSurveys and QuestionnairesAfrican Americanscontent analysishealth literacyprostate health

Identifiers

PMID29649921
PMCPMC6131445

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.