Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33457554›Full record

ArticleJournal of patient experience2020

Comparing Perspectives of Canadian Men Diagnosed With Prostate Cancer and Health Care Professionals About Active Surveillance.

Margaret Fitch, Veronique Ouellet, Kittie Pang, Simone Chevalier, Darrel E Drachenberg, Antonio Finelli, Jean-Baptiste Lattouf, Carmen Loiselle, Alan So, Simon Sutcliffe and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of patient experience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
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

13 authors.

Margaret FitchSunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Veronique OuelletInstitut du cancer de Montréal and Centre de recherche du Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Quebec, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1854-7082
Kittie PangSunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Simone ChevalierMcGill University and McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Darrel E DrachenbergManitoba Prostate Centre, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
Antonio FinelliUniversity Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Jean-Baptiste LattoufInstitut du cancer de Montréal and Centre de recherche du Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Quebec, Canada.
Carmen LoiselleDepartment of Oncology and Ingram School of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1981-2645
Alan SoVancouver Prostate Centre, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Simon SutcliffeTerry Fox Research Institute, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Simon TanguayMcGill University and McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Fred SaadInstitut du cancer de Montréal and Centre de recherche du Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Quebec, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2986-5617
Anne-Marie Mes-MassonInstitut du cancer de Montréal and Centre de recherche du Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Quebec, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Active surveillance (AS) has gained acceptance as a primary management approach for patients diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer (PC). In this qualitative study, we compared perspectives between patients and health care professionals (HCP) to identify what may contribute to patient-provider discordance, influence patient decision-making, and interfere with the uptake of AS. We performed a systematic comparison of perspectives about AS reported from focus groups with men eligible for AS (7 groups, N = 52) and HCP (5 groups, N = 48) who engaged in conversations about AS with patient. We used conventional content analysis to scrutinize separately focus group transcripts and reached a consensus on similar or divergent viewpoints between them. Patients and clinicians agreed that AS was appropriate for low grade PC and understood the low-risk nature of the disease. They shared the perspective that disease status was a critical factor to pursue or discontinue AS. However, men expressed a greater emphasis on quality of life in their decisions related to AS. Patients and clinicians differed in their perspectives on the clarity, availability, and volume of information needed and offered; clinicians acknowledged variations between HCP when presenting AS, while patients were often compelled to seek additional information beyond what was provided by physicians and experienced difficulty in finding or interpreting information applicable to their situation. A greater understanding of discordant perspectives about AS between patients and HCP can help improve patient engagement and education, inform development of knowledge-based tools or aids for decision-making, and identify areas that require standardization across the clinical practice.

Indexed as

active surveillancehealth care professional perspectivespatient perspectivesprostate cancer

Identifiers

PMID33457554
PMCPMC7786672

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.