Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34545468›Full record

ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2022

Discontinuing Cancer Screening for Older Adults: a Comparison of Clinician Decision-Making for Breast, Colorectal, and Prostate Cancer Screenings.

Justine P Enns, Craig E Pollack, Cynthia M Boyd, Jacqueline Massare, Nancy L Schoenborn

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Justine P EnnsThe Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Craig E PollackThe Johns Hopkins University School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Cynthia M BoydThe Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Jacqueline MassareThe Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Nancy L SchoenbornThe Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. nancyli@jhmi.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-5053-5132
Johns Hopkins University · US

Funding

Summer Research Training in Aging for Medical StudentsT35AG026758 · NIA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Stephanie Nothelle, Sevil Yasar · 2005 to 2026
$1.9M
Patient-Centered Care for Older Adults with Multiple Chronic Conditions: Research and Mentoring ProgramK24AG056578 · NIA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI BOYD, CYNTHIA MELINDA · 2017 to 2021
$1.1M
Improving cancer screening in older adults with limited life expectancyK76AG059984 · NIA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI SCHOENBORN, NANCY · 2018 to 2021
$972k
NIA NIH HHS K24 AG056578NIA NIH HHS K76 AG059984NIA NIH HHS T35 AG026758
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhile guidelines recommend against routine screening for breast, prostate, and colorectal cancers in older adults (65+ years) with <10-year life expectancy, many of these patients continue to be screened. How clinicians consider screening cessation across multiple cancer screening types is unknown.

objectiveTo compare and contrast clinicians' perspectives on discontinuing breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer screenings in older adults.

designQualitative, semi-structured interviews.

participantsPrimary care clinicians in Maryland (N=30) APPROACH: We conducted semi-structured interviews with individual clinicians. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using standard techniques of qualitative content analysis to identify major themes. KEY

resultsParticipants were mostly physicians (24/30) and women (16/30). Four major themes highlighted differences in decision-making across cancer screenings: (1) Clinicians reported more often screening beyond guideline-recommended ages for breast and prostate cancers than colorectal cancer; (2) clinicians had different priorities when considering the benefits/harms of each screening; for example, some prioritized continuing colorectal cancer screening due to the test's high efficacy while others prioritized stopping colorectal cancer screening due to high procedural risk; some prioritized continuing prostate cancer screening due to poor outcomes from advanced prostate cancer while others prioritized stopping prostate cancer screening due to high false positive test rates and harms from downstream tests; (3) clinicians discussed harms of prostate and colorectal cancer screening more readily than for breast cancer screening; (4) clinicians perceived more involvement with gastroenterologists in colonoscopy decisions and less involvement from specialists for prostate and breast cancer screening.

conclusionsOur results highlight the need for more explicit guidance on how to weigh competing considerations in cancer screening (such as test accuracy versus ease of cancer treatment after detection). Recognizing the complexity of the benefit/harms analysis as clinicians consider multiple cancer screenings, future decision support tools, and clinician education materials can specifically address the competing considerations.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsProstatic NeoplasmsAgedEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMaleMass ScreeningProstate-Specific AntigenProstate-Specific Antigencancercommunicationdecision-makingoverscreeningscreening

Identifiers

PMID34545468
PMCPMC8971256
OpenAlexW3201315462

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.