ArticleJournal of family medicine and primary care2021
The association between the knowledge on prostate cancer screening with the beliefs and behaviors of Saudi men attending King Khalid University Hospital.
Article in Journal of family medicine and primary care, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing digital rectal examination and prostate-specific antigen knowledge: a study of Syrian medical students' knowledge for prostate cancer screening.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Health belief model and cervical cancer screening intention among lower socioeconomic women in Malaysia: a pilot study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Assessment of prostate cancer awareness and screening knowledge among men in Najran, Saudi Arabia: a cross-sectional study.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2025Article
- Prostate Cancer Knowledge and Attitude Toward Screening Practices Among Men 40 and Over in the Jazan Region, Saudi Arabia.Journal of cancer epidemiology · 2024Article
- Awareness of prostate cancer and its screening tests in men in the Middle East: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of family & community medicineReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The evidence showed that prostate cancer (PC) is the second most common malignancy in men globally. Unfortunately, it rarely produces symptoms, and the diagnosis is delayed until the tumor is advanced. Objectives: To determine the participants' uptake of prostate cancer screening (PCS). Also, to assess their perceptions regarding PCS. Furthermore, to evaluate the association between patients' knowledge of PC and their beliefs and behaviors towards PCS. Methods: This cross-sectional study recruited men aged older than 40attending the King Khalid University Hospital (KKUH) between October 2020 and March 2021. SMS messages were sent to a random sample of 228 participants, inviting them to participate in an online self-administered questionnaire. The questionnaire consisted of 1- demography and history of PCS; 2- the knowledge questionnaire about PC; 3-the Champion's Health Belief Model (HBM). Results: Out of the 228 participants, 45.2% were men aged 60 years and above, 54.4% with college degrees and postgraduate studies, and 92.5% were married. The median knowledge score was 5, and the range was 12. Most men (72.4%) had a low knowledge score, and 79.4% of them did not have a previous PCS. Men aged 60 + were more likely to undergo the screening than their counterparts, with Conclusion: The majority of the participants had poor knowledge regarding PC and PCS. Only a fifth of the men did PCS. High knowledge was associated with PSA and DRE perceived benefits and health motivation.
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.