Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31065839›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2020

Exploring the impact of providing men with information about potential prostate cancer treatment options prior to receiving biopsy results.

Brindha Pillay, Daniel Moon, Denny Meyer, Helen Crowe, Sarah Mann, Nicholas Howard, Addie Wootten, Mark Frydenberg

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Brindha PillayEpworth Prostate Centre, Epworth Healthcare, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. bpillay37@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2142-1002
Daniel MoonEpworth Centre for Robotic Surgery, Epsworth Healthcare, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Denny MeyerSchool of Health Sciences, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Helen CroweEpworth Prostate Centre, Epworth Healthcare, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Sarah MannAustralian Urology Associates, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Nicholas HowardEpworth Prostate Centre, Epworth Healthcare, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Addie WoottenEpworth Prostate Centre, Epworth Healthcare, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Mark FrydenbergAustralian Urology Associates, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Prostate Cancer Foundation of Australia · AUThe Royal Melbourne Hospital · AUEpworth Hospital · AUSwinburne University of Technology · AUThe University of Melbourne · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThere is little research assessing the impact of providing men with information about prostate cancer (PCa) treatment options at the time of referral for a prostate biopsy. Study objectives were to determine whether receiving an information booklet about PCa treatment options prior to receiving biopsy results was acceptable to patients, and if receiving this information influenced levels of anxiety, depression, distress, and treatment decisional conflict.

methodsBetween June 2016 and September 2017, a randomised block design was used to allocate patients from an Australian urology practice into the intervention or control group. Patients in the intervention group were provided with written information about treatment options for localised PCa prior to their biopsy. Outcome measures including the Distress Thermometer, Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7, Patient Health Questionnaire-9, and Decisional Conflict Scale were completed pre-biopsy and 2-3 weeks post-biopsy. Ninety-eight patients referred for an initial prostate biopsy for an elevated PSA test or suspicious digital rectal exam participated in the study (response rate = 78%).

resultsMultimodal repeated-measures analyses showed no significant differences between control and intervention groups in changes in distress, anxiety, or depression from pre- to post-biopsy, and in decisional conflict post-diagnosis (all p > .05). Thirty-five (87%) patients believed that the resource made it easier to understand subsequent explanation of treatment options, and 51 patients (98%) who received the intervention preferred to be given information at that time.

conclusionsProviding patients with information about treatment options prior to biopsy did not impact on changes in psychological distress and decisional conflict post-biopsy. However, the majority of patients preferred to be given such information at this time point.

Indexed as

Decision MakingAgedAnxietyAustraliaBiopsyClinical Decision-MakingDepressionHumansMaleMiddle AgedOutcome Assessment, Health CareProstatic NeoplasmsReferral and ConsultationCancerDecisional conflictDistressOncologyProstate biopsyTreatment decision aid

Identifiers

PMID31065839
OpenAlexW2944644736

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.