ArticleProstate cancer2022
Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening According to Health Professional Counseling and Age in the United States.
Article in Prostate cancer, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prostate-specific antigen testing in the United States during 2008-2022 in relation to the US preventive services task force recommendations.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Multidimensional Healthcare Access Barriers to Prostate-Specific Antigen Testing: A Nation-Wide Panel Study in the United States From 2006 to 2020.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Prostate Cancer Screening Uptake in Transgender Women.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- Low-Value Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening in Older Males.JAMA network open · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn 2018, the US Preventive Services Task Force recommended that PSA screening for prostate cancer involve men aged 55-69, based on a personal decision following consultation with a health professional. PSA screening in men aged 70 or older should only occur if symptoms exist. This study identifies the association between having a PSA test in the past two years and whether or not there was consultation with a health professional about the benefits and/or harms of PSA screening.
methodsAnalyses were based on data involving men aged 40 years or older, who responded to PSA related questions in the 2018 BRFSS survey.
resultsApproximately 32.0% (14.6% for ages 40-54, 41.7% for ages 55-69, and 49.8% for ages 70 years and older) of respondents had a PSA test in the past two years. Approximately 81.7% of these men had talked with a health professional about the benefits and/or harms of PSA screening, with 42.4% having discussed the benefits and harms, 54.6% having discussed the benefits only, and 3.0% having discussed the harms only. The odds of a PSA test in the past two years in men having talked with a health professional about the benefits and harms of the test versus no talk are 10.1 (95% CI 9.3-10.8), in men who talked with a health professional about the benefits only versus no talk are 10.8 (95% CI 10.0-11.6), and in men who talked with a health professional about the harms only versus no talk are 3.9 (95% CI 2.9-5.1).
conclusionPSA screening is most common in men aged 70 or older, which is counter to the US Preventive Task Force recommendation. Most men having a PSA test have talked with a health professional about the test, but the talks tended to focus on just the benefits of screening and not both potential benefits and harms.
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.