ArticleUrology2020
Shared Decision-making in Urologic Practice: Results From the 2019 AUA Census.
Article in Urology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Empowering patient choice: a systematic review of decision aids for benign prostatic hyperplasia.BJU international · 2025Pooled it
- Patient's preferences: an unmet need by current urolithiasis guidelines: a systematic review.World journal of urology · 2023Pooled it
- Shared decision-making among patients undergoing surgery for pelvic floor dysfunction: a cross-sectional study.BMC women's health · 2026Article
- Adapting patient priorities care for older adults with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: A qualitative inquiry.Urologic oncology · 2026Article
- Article
- Topic Mapping to Inform Content to Discuss in Shared Decision-Making for Prostate Cancer.Urology · 2025Article
- [Shared decision making-strengthening patient-physiciant relations through joint deliberation].Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Review
- Use of Persuasive Language in Communication of Risk during Prostate Cancer Treatment Consultations.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2024Article
- Predictors of Regret among Older Men after Stress Urinary Incontinence Treatment Decisions.The Journal of urology · 2022Article
- Delivering patient-centered care through shared decision making in overactive bladder.Neurourology and urodynamics · 2022Review
- Shared decision-making in urology and female pelvic floor medicine and reconstructive surgery.Nature reviews. Urology · 2022Review
- Factors Associated with Decision Aid Use in Localized Prostate Cancer.Urology practice · 2022Article
- Patients' perspective on shared decision-making in urology: a prospective study at a university hospital.World journal of urology · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo establish the rates of self-reported shared decision-making (SDM) and decision aid use among practicing urologists. Additionally, we aim to determine the practice factors that influence SDM use. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis study uses data from the 2019 American Urological Association Annual Census SDM module. Urologists were presented with a rubric of 7 preference sensitive clinical situations and asked to choose the elements of SDM that they regularly use for the diagnosis. Multivariable logistic regression models were fit to evaluate factors contributing to the use of SDM.
resultsTwo thousand two hundred and nineteen urologists responded. Of these, 77% reported that they regularly use SDM in at least 1 preference sensitive clinical scenario. Between 40% and 58% regularly gave patients decision aids. Urologists who reported barriers to SDM had a decreased odds of reporting SDM (adjusted odds ratio OR [aOR] 0.80 [95% confidence interval [CI] 0.71-0.91]). Those practicing in academic settings (aOR 0.78 [95% CI 0.69-0.88]) were less likely than those in private practice to report SDM use. The number of patient visits per week was inversely associated with SDM use, with greater than 76 visits per week having decreased odds (aOR 0.65 [95% CI 0.57-0.74]).
conclusionIn this sample of practicing urologists in the United States, the majority report regularly using SDM. However, rates of SDM varied by training, practice setting and clinical volume. Our findings highlight specific opportunities to improve in SDM in urology.
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.