ArticleUrology practice2019
Evaluating Clinical Implementation Approaches for Prostate Cancer Decision Support.
Article in Urology practice, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Digitally engaging participants in cancer clinical trials: Design and pilot of the Alliance Participant Engagement Portal (PEP).JNCI cancer spectrum · 2026Article
- Providing Decision Support for Prostate Cancer Through Cancer Registry Contacts.Journal of registry management · 2026Article
- Development, implementation and evaluation of patient decision aids supporting shared decision making in women with recurrent ovarian cancer.PEC innovation · 2023Article
- The Implementation in Context (ICON) Framework: A meta-framework of context domains, attributes and features in healthcare.Health research policy and systems · 2023Article
- Factors Associated with Decision Aid Use in Localized Prostate Cancer.Urology practice · 2022Article
- What Works in Implementing Patient Decision Aids in Routine Clinical Settings? A Rapid Realist Review and Update from the International Patient Decision Aid Standards Collaboration.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2021Review
- A principal components analysis of factors associated with successful implementation of an LVAD decision support tool.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2021Article
- A Qualitative Study of Men's Experiences Using Navigate: A Localized Prostate Cancer Treatment Decision Aid.MDM policy & practiceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionShared decision making is widely promoted for counseling men with localized prostate cancer. Results of randomized trials suggest decision aid efficacy. However, few practices or institutions have implemented decision support as standard practice. In this study we evaluated various implementation strategies for the decision aid P3P (Personal Patient Profile-Prostate) and analyzed feedback from clinical site staff and providers.
methodsA hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation trial was conducted. Primary data were collected in 6 urology clinics of 3 geographically distinct health networks. During the implementation phase site specific strategies were codesigned with site leaders. Referral and access metrics for men with localized prostate cancer were monitored for up to 7 months. Clinical staff reports of barriers and facilitators of implementation were evaluated in professionally facilitated focus groups.
resultsOf 495 men with localized prostate cancer seen in the clinics 252 (51%, 95% CI 46-55) were informed of the program and of those men 107 (43%, 95% CI 36-49) accessed it. The highest access rates were observed with patient care coordinator e-mail and telephone contact (82%) or verbal physician instruction followed by e-mail and telephone invitations (87%). During focus groups physicians appraised the summaries as useful. Staff identified barriers included creating new workflows within heavy workloads and staff misunderstanding of context and resources. Promoters of successful implementation included an identified clinical lead and physician engagement.
conclusionsImplementation success was realized when physicians engaged and staff provided followup contact. New practice changes to implement interventions require multimodal strategies for early success.
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.