Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31375427›Full record

ArticleEuropean urology oncology2020

Consulting "Dr. Google" for Prostate Cancer Treatment Options: A Contemporary Worldwide Trend Analysis.

Giovanni E Cacciamani, Silvia Bassi, Marco Sebben, Anna Marcer, Giorgio I Russo, Andrea Cocci, Paolo Dell'Oglio, Luis G Medina, Nima Nassiri, Alessandro Tafuri and 6 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European urology oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Google Trends application for the study of information search behaviour on oropharyngeal cancer in Spain.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2021
    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

16 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Giovanni E CacciamaniDepartment of Urology, University of Verona, Verona, Italy; Urology Institute, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. Electronic address: giovanni.cacciamani@med.usc.edu.
Silvia BassiDepartment of Urology, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Marco SebbenDepartment of Urology, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Anna MarcerDepartment of Urology, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Giorgio I RussoDepartment of Urology, University of Catania, Catania, Italy.
Andrea CocciDepartment of Urology, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Paolo Dell'OglioDepartment of Urology, San Raffaele Hospital, Milano, Italy.
Luis G MedinaUrology Institute, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Nima NassiriUrology Institute, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Alessandro TafuriDepartment of Urology, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Andre AbreuUrology Institute, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Antonio B PorcaroDepartment of Urology, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Alberto BrigantiDepartment of Urology, San Raffaele Hospital, Milano, Italy.
Francesco MontorsiDepartment of Urology, San Raffaele Hospital, Milano, Italy.
Inderbir S GillUrology Institute, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Walter ArtibaniDepartment of Urology, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
University of Verona · ITUniversity of Southern California · USUniversity of Catania · ITUniversity of Florence · IT

Funding

USC/NORRIS COMPREHENSIVE CANCER CENTER (CORE) SUPPORTP30CA014089 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI MYLES G COCKBURN · 1985 to 2026
$181.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA014089
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the era of digital data, the Internet has become the primary source from which individuals draw healthcare information.

objectiveThe aim of the present study is to determine worldwide public interest in prostate cancer (PCa) treatments, their penetrance and variation, and how they compare over time. DESIGN, SETTING, AND

participantsAn analysis of worldwide search-engine trends included electronic Google queries from people who searched PCa treatment options from January 2004 to August 2018, worldwide. Join-point regression was performed. Comparisons of annual relative search volume (ARSV), average annual percentage change (AAPC), and temporal patterns were analysed to assess loss or gain of interest. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Evaluations were made regarding (1) interest in PCa treatments, (2) comparison of people's interest, and (3) impact of the US Preventive Service Task Force (USPSTF) screening recommendation and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guideline endorsements on Internet searching for PCa treatments. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The mean ARSV for "prostatectomy" was 73% in 2004 and decreased thereafter, reaching a nadir of 36% in 2014 (APC: -7.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI] -7.8, -6.7; p < 0.01). Similarly, decreased interest was recorded for radiation therapy (AAPC: -3.2%; p = 0.1), high-intensity focused ultrasound (AAPC: -2.3%; p = 0.1), hormonal therapy (AAPC: -11.6%; p < 0.01), ablation therapy (AAPC: -4.1%; p < 0.01), cryotherapy (AAPC: -9.9%; p < 0.01), and brachytherapy (AAPC: -8.3%; p < 0.01). A steep interest was found in active surveillance (AS) (AAPC: +14.2%; p < 0.01) and focal therapy (AAPC: +27.5%; p < 0.01). When trends were compared before and after NCCN and USPSTF recommendations, a consistent decrease of all the treatment options was found, while interest in focal therapy and AS showed an augmented mean ARSV (+19.6 and +31.6, respectively).

conclusionsPeople are increasingly searching the Internet for PCa treatment options. A parallel decrease of interest was found for the nonmonitoring treatments, except for focal therapy, while an important growth of appeal has been recorded for AS. Understanding people inquisitiveness together with their degree of knowledge could be supportive to guiding counselling in the decision-making process and putting effort in certifying patient information. PATIENT SUMMARY: In the era of digital data, patients are increasingly searching the Internet for prostate cancer (PCa) treatment options. To safeguard patients' knowledge, it is mandatory to understand how people seek healthcare information, guaranteeing certified and evidence-based information pertaining to PCa treatments options.

Indexed as

Information Seeking BehaviorInternetGlobal HealthHumansMaleProstatic NeoplasmsActive surveillanceBrachytherapyCryoablationFocal therapyGoogle TrendsHigh-intensity focused ultrasoundHormonal therapyLiving paperPatient informationProstate cancerProstatectomyRadiotherapy

Identifiers

PMID31375427
PMCPMC9235534
OpenAlexW2964488478

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.