Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29884180›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2018

Describing perspectives of health care professionals on active surveillance for the management of prostate cancer.

Kittie Pang, Margaret Fitch, Veronique Ouellet, Simone Chevalier, Darrel E Drachenberg, Antonio Finelli, Jean-Baptiste Lattouf, Alan So, Simon Sutcliffe, Simon Tanguay and 2 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

12 authors.

Kittie PangSunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, 2075 Bayview Ave, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Margaret FitchBloomberg Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Veronique OuelletInstitut du cancer de Montréal and Centre de recherche du Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, 900, St Denis St, Montréal, QC, Canada.
Simone ChevalierMcGill University and McGill University Health Centre, 1001 Decarie Blvd, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Darrel E DrachenbergManitoba Prostate Centre, 675 McDermot Ave, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.
Antonio FinelliUniversity Health Network, 610 University Ave, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Jean-Baptiste LattoufInstitut du cancer de Montréal and Centre de recherche du Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, 900, St Denis St, Montréal, QC, Canada.
Alan SoVancouver Prostate Centre, 2660 Oak St, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Simon SutcliffeTerry Fox Research Institute, 675 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Simon TanguayMcGill University and McGill University Health Centre, 1001 Decarie Blvd, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Fred SaadInstitut du cancer de Montréal and Centre de recherche du Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, 900, St Denis St, Montréal, QC, Canada. fred.saad@umontreal.ca.ORCID 0000-0003-2986-5617
Anne-Marie Mes-MassonInstitut du cancer de Montréal and Centre de recherche du Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, 900, St Denis St, Montréal, QC, Canada.

Funding

Terry Fox Research Institute 2009-17
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOver the last decade, active surveillance has proven to be a safe approach for patients with low-risk prostate cancer. Although active surveillance presents several advantages for both patients and the health care system, all eligible patients do not adopt this approach. Our goal was to evaluate the factors that influence physicians to recommend active surveillance and the barriers that impact adherence to this approach.

methodsFocus groups (n = 5) were held with physicians who provided care for men with low-risk prostate cancer and had engaged in conversations with men and their families about active surveillance. The experience of health care professionals (HCPs) was captured to understand their decisions in proposing active surveillance and to reveal the barriers and facilitators that affect the adherence to this approach. A content analysis was performed on the verbatim transcripts from the sessions.

resultsAlthough physicians agreed that active surveillance is a suitable approach for low-risk prostate cancer patients, they were concerned about the rapidly evolving and non-standardized guidelines for patient follow-up. They pointed out the need for additional tools to appropriately identify proper patients for whom active surveillance is the best option. Urologists and radiation-oncologists were keen to collaborate with each other, but the role of general practitioner remained controversial once patients were referred to a specialist.

conclusionsIntegration of more reliable tools and/or markers in addition to more specific guidelines for patient follow-up would increase the confidence of both patients and physicians in the choice of active surveillance.

Indexed as

Practice Patterns, Physicians'Watchful WaitingAdultAgedAttitude of Health PersonnelChoice BehaviorClinical Decision-MakingCommunicationFemaleFocus GroupsHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient CompliancePatient SelectionPhysicians, FamilyActive surveillanceDecision-makingFocus groupLow-risk diseaseProstate cancer

Identifiers

PMID29884180
PMCPMC5994022

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.