Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29877127›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of men's health2018

Understanding Medical Decision-making in Prostate Cancer Care.

Rachel Thera, Dr Tracey Carr, Dr Gary Groot, Nicole Baba, Dr Kunal Jana

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
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 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. A prospective evaluation of patient perspectives and financial considerations during prostate cancer treatment decision-making.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2023
    Article
  9. Men's experiences of receiving a prostate cancer diagnosis after opportunistic screening-A qualitative descriptive secondary analysis.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Treatment decision-making in men with localized prostate cancer living in a remote area: A cross-sectional, observational study.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2021
    Article
  14. 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

5 authors.

Rachel Thera1 University of Saskatchewan College of Medicine, Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
Dr Tracey Carr2 Department of Community Health & Epidemiology, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
Dr Gary Groot2 Department of Community Health & Epidemiology, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
Nicole Baba3 Leslie and Irene Dube Urology Centre of Health, Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
Dr Kunal Jana4 Department of Surgery, Division of Urology, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The availability of several treatment options for prostate cancer creates a situation where patients may need to come to a shared decision with their health-care team regarding their care. Shared decision-making (SDM) is the concept of a patient and a health-care professional collaborating to make decisions about the patient's treatment course. Nurse navigators (NNs) are health-care professionals often involved in the SDM process. The current project sought to evaluate the way in which patients with prostate cancer make decisions regarding their care and to determine patients' perspectives of the role of the NN in the SDM process. Eleven participants were recruited from the Prostate Assessment Centre by a NN. They were interviewed via telephone and their responses were analyzed using thematic analysis. Five interacting factors were determined to influence the way participants made decisions including level of anxiety, desire to maintain normalcy, support system quality, exposure to cancer narratives, and extent of practical concerns. NNs were found to increase knowledge, decrease indecision, and provide reassurance for participants. Based on the beneficial aspects of NN interaction reported in this study, the use of NNs in SDM programs should be encouraged. The results of the study demonstrate the complexity of the decision-making process when it comes to prostate cancer treatment. The factors elucidated in the study should be considered during the development and implementation of prostate cancer SDM programs.

Indexed as

Decision MakingPatient ParticipationAgedClinical Decision-MakingHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisProstatectomyProstatic NeoplasmsQualitative ResearchRadiotherapyRisk AssessmentTreatment OutcomeWatchful Waitinggeneral health and wellnesshealth-care issueshealth communicationinformed decision-makingnurse navigatorsoncology/cancerprostate cancershared decision-making

Identifiers

PMID29877127
PMCPMC6142146

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.