Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30987436›Full record

ArticleEthnicity & health2021

'I'm not a chance taker': A mixed methods exploration of factors affecting prostate cancer treatment decision-making.

Otis L Owens, Robin M Estrada, Kim Johnson, Micheal Cogdell, Daniel B Fried, Lucy Gansauer, Simon Kim

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ethnicity & health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. A Scoping Review of Stigma Related to Prostate Cancer in Black Men.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Otis L OwensCollege of Social Work, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA.
Robin M EstradaCollege of Nursing, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA.
Kim JohnsonSpartanburg Gibbs Cancer Center and Research Institute, Spartanburg, SC, USA.
Micheal CogdellSpartanburg Gibbs Cancer Center and Research Institute, Spartanburg, SC, USA.
Daniel B FriedSpartanburg Gibbs Cancer Center and Research Institute, Spartanburg, SC, USA.
Lucy GansauerSpartanburg Gibbs Cancer Center and Research Institute, Spartanburg, SC, USA.
Simon KimYale University Cancer Outcomes Public Policy and Effectiveness Research (COPPER) Center, Urology Institute, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Spartanburg Regional Healthcare System · USUniversity of South Carolina · USUniversity Hospitals of Cleveland · US

Funding

University of Kentucky Markey Cancer Center Support Grant ECIA SupplementP30CA177558 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY · PI Jennifer F Rogers · 2013 to 2026
$38.3M
A Patient-Centered Asthma Management Communication Intervention for Rural Latino ChildrenK23HL133596 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA AT COLUMBIA · PI DAWSON, ROBIN MICHELLE · 2017 to 2021
$722k
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA177558NHLBI NIH HHS K23 HL133596
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesAfrican American prostate cancer survivors experience post-treatment decisional regret more often than European Americans, which can lead to negative long-term effects on quality of life. A prominent driver of health-related decision-making is emotion, yet little work has examined the impact emotions may have on decisional regret. The goal of this study was to explore experiences, perceptions, and emotions of prostate cancer survivors in relation to their diagnostic and treatment decision-making processes, prostate cancer treatment, and outcomes. Additionally, we sought to identify factors that might explain differences in prostate cancer outcomes between African and European Americans.

designThis mixed-methods study utilized a convergent parallel design, in which quantitative and qualitative data were collected simultaneously and then integrated to more robustly explain relationships between variables. Survivors were eligible for the study if they had been previously diagnosed with localized prostate cancer and were no more than six months post-treatment. The study was guided by the Risk as Feelings Model, which predicts the relationship between emotion and cognition in high-risk decision-making.

resultsNo men experienced decisional regret following treatment, even if they experienced side effects. While all men reported being surprised about their prostate cancer diagnosis, strong negative emotions were more common among men under 65. Family support and spirituality appeared to mitigate negative emotions. Perceived authenticity of provider communication was the most influential mediator in men's decision-making and positive perceptions of their outcomes.

conclusionsTo mitigate the impact emotional responses have on decision-making and post-treatment regret, providers should explore alternate therapies (e.g. counseling for men diagnosed with prostate cancer at a young age) and include family members in prostate cancer treatment discussions. Most importantly, providers should be aware of the importance of quality communication on men's cognitive and emotional processes and their perceptions of treatment outcomes.

Indexed as

ProstateProstatic NeoplasmsDecision MakingEmotionsHumansMaleQuality of Lifedecision makingemotionshealthcare disparitiesProstatic neoplasmstreatment outcome

Identifiers

PMID30987436
PMCPMC7184517
OpenAlexW2935970422

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.