ArticleProstate cancer and prostatic diseases2021
Shared decision making and prostate-specific antigen based prostate cancer screening following the 2018 update of USPSTF screening guideline.
Article in Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.
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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Improvement of quality of life and symptom burden after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in patients with moderate to severe LUTS.Scientific reports · 2021Trial
- Rural-urban disparities in prostate-specific antigen testing and shared decision-making in the US.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2026Article
- Influence of life expectancy on shared decision-making for prostate cancer screening.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2025Article
- PSAzing up patient care: a quality improvement project for informed cancer screening.BMJ open quality · 2025Article
- Perspectives of clinicians and screening candidates on shared decision-making in prostate cancer screening with the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test: a qualitative study (PROSHADE study).BMJ evidence-based medicine · 2025Article
- Perspectives and Misconceptions of an Online Adult Male Cohort Regarding Prostate Cancer Screening.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024Article
- Shared decision-making before prostate cancer screening decisions.Nature reviews. Urology · 2024Review
- Factors Influencing Prostate Cancer Screening Intentions in Lebanese Men.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2024Article
- Opportunistic prostate-specific antigen testing in Norwegian men: a public health challenge.BJU international · 2024Article
- Barriers and facilitators of shared decision-making in prostate cancer screening in primary care: A systematic review.Preventive medicine reports · 2024Review
- Cancer Screening in the United States During the Second Year of the COVID-19 Pandemic.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2023Article
- Article
- Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, part 1: National cancer statistics.Cancer · 2022Article
- Review
- The slope associated with nadir prostate-specific antigen is prognostically significant in men with hormone-sensitive prostate cancer after primary androgen deprivation therapy.Cancer medicine · 2022Article
- Number of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening tests in the last five years reported by men in the United States in 2010, 2015, and 2018.Urologic oncology · 2022Article
- Peace of Mind: A Role in Unnecessary Care?Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2022Article
- Liquid biomarkers for early detection of prostate cancer and summary of available data for their use in African-American men.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2022Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrevious study reported shared decision making was underused in PSA-based prostate cancer screening. In mid-2018, the US Preventive Service Task Force recommended shared decision making (SDM) before PSA-based prostate cancer screening among men aged 55-69 year while remained against PSA testing in men aged 70 or older. The objective of this study is to examine recent changes in SDM and prostate cancer screening following recent USPSTF recommendations.
methodsA retrospective cross-sectional study among men aged 50 years or older were conducted using 2015 and 2018 National Health Interview Survey data (n = 10,926). Outcomes included self-reported PSA testing for prostate cancer screening last year, and if yes, whether respondent ever had a discussion with the healthcare provider about its advantages and disadvantages. Analyses were stratified by respondent's age (50-54 vs. 55-69 vs. 70+).
resultsRoutine PSA screening rates remained stable from 34.3% in 2015 to 35.4% in first half of 2018, and 36.0% in second half of 2018 (p trend = 0.57). A similar pattern was found in men ≥70 years (p trend = 0.98). Receipt of SDM increased in men aged ≥50 years from 30.5% in 2015 to 33.6% in first half of 2018, and 36.7% in second half of 2018 (p trend = 0.002). The increase was most prominent in men aged 55 to 69 years (31.6, 36.9, and 40.2% in 2015, first half of 2018 and second half of 2018 respectively; p trend = 0.001).
conclusionsBetween 2015 and 2018, there was no significant increase in the PSA-based prostate cancer screening. However, a significant increasing trend in SDM was observed, especially in men aged 55-69 years.
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.