ArticleUrology practice2017
Impact of a Prostate Specific Antigen Screening Decision Aid on Clinic Function.
Article in Urology practice, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Shared medical decision in prostate cancer screening in primary care: a systematic literature review of current evidence.International urology and nephrology · 2024Pooled it
- A Provider-Facing Decision Support Tool for Prostate Cancer Screening in Primary Care: A Pilot Study.Applied clinical informatics · 2024Article
- Barriers and facilitators of shared decision-making in prostate cancer screening in primary care: A systematic review.Preventive medicine reports · 2024Review
- Effect of a Prostate Cancer Screening Decision Aid for African-American Men in Primary Care Settings.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2020Article
- Attitudes Toward Genomic Testing and Prostate Cancer Research Among Black Men.American journal of preventive medicine · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionDecision aids (DAs) around prostate cancer screening can increase knowledge and shared decision making (SDM), but remain underutilized due to cost and time constraints that disrupt clinic flow. We examined the impact of a simple prostate specific antigen (PSA) screening DA distribution strategy on clinic flow as well as SDM in a diverse urban primary care clinic.
methodsMen ages 50-75 viewed the DA while waiting for physicians. Participants and physicians completed questionnaires evaluating the SDM process. Focus groups were conducted with clinic staff and physicians to evaluate the impact on clinic operations.
resultsFifty percent of men discussed PSA screening and 85% reported the DA made decision making easier. Participants reported an average of 12.9 min reading the DA. Participants reported high decision satisfaction and low decisional conflict. Physicians reported an average of 5.2 minutes discussing PSA screening. Clinic staff reported increased enthusiasm for the process after adjustments were made in response to concerns including time, and lack of both knowledge about the DA subject matter and involvement in the process. Physician-reported barriers included ambivalence about PSA screening.
conclusionsA PSA DA, requiring few resources, can be implemented with broad involvement of clinic staff and minimal disruption to clinic flow in an urban primary care clinic, and may facilitate SDM.
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.