ArticleAmerican journal of men's health2018
Patient Preferences and Urologist Judgments on Prostate Cancer Therapy in Japan.
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 15 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Stated Preferences for Systemic Treatments for Prostate Cancer: A Targeted Review of the Discrete-Choice Experiment Literature.The patient · 2026Pooled it
- The Evolving Landscape of Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Pooled it
- Differences between physician and patient preferences for cancer treatments: a systematic review.BMC cancer · 2023Pooled it
- Pooled it
- What matters to society when making decisions about reimbursing drugs for prostate cancer: a discrete choice experiment.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2026Article
- Article
- Elevating the Patient Voice: Understanding Treatment Preferences in Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer.Advances in therapy · 2025Article
- Physician and Patient Preferences for the Treatment of Metastatic Castration-Sensitive and Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: A Best-Worst Scaling Study in Japan.Oncology and therapy · 2025Article
- Patient engagement in designing and publishing research in prostate cancer: a scoping review.Future oncology (London, England) · 2024Article
- Patient and General Population Preferences Regarding the Benefits and Harms of Treatment for Metastatic Prostate Cancer: A Discrete Choice Experiment.European urology open science · 2023Article
- A Systematic Review of Patients' Values, Preferences, and Expectations for the Treatment of Metastatic Prostate Cancer.European urology open science · 2022Review
- Patient Preference Studies for Advanced Prostate Cancer Treatment Along the Medical Product Life Cycle: Systematic Literature Review.Patient preference and adherence · 2022Review
- Unmet needs in non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer from the Japanese patient perspective: a discrete choice experiment.BMJ open · 2021Observational
- Understanding Treatment Strategies and Preferences in Nonmetastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer From the Japanese Physician Perspective.JCO global oncology · 2021Article
- Patient and Physician Preferences for Therapy Characteristics for Psoriasis: A Discrete Choice Experiment in Japan.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of the present study is to investigate the concordance of treatment preferences between patients and physicians in prostate cancer (PCa) in Japan. An internet-based discrete choice experiment was conducted. Patients and physicians were asked to select their preferred treatment from a pair of hypothetical treatments consisting of four attributes: quality of life (QOL), treatment effectiveness, side effects, and accessibility of treatment. The data were analyzed using a conditional logistic regression model to calculate coefficients and the relative importance (RI) of each attribute. A total of 103 PCa patients and 127 physicians responded. The study looked at 37 patients considered as advanced PCa and 66 who were non-advanced PCa. All of the physicians were urologists. Advanced PCa patients ranked the attributes as follows: treatment effectiveness (RI: 32%), accessibility of treatment (RI: 26%), QOL (RI: 23%), and side effects (RI: 19%). For physicians, the RI ranking was the same as for advanced PCa patients; treatment effectiveness (RI: 29%), accessibility of treatment (RI: 27%), QOL (RI: 26%), and side effects (RI: 18%). For non-advanced PCa patients, accessibility of treatment ranked the highest RI (27%) and treatment effectiveness ranked as the lowest RI (14%). Our study suggests that the ranking of the attributes was consistent between advanced PCa patients and physicians. The most influential attribute was treatment effectiveness. Treatment preferences also vary by disease stage.
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.