ArticleScandinavian journal of primary health care2022
General practitioners' reflections on using PSA for diagnosis of prostate cancer. A qualitative study.
Article in Scandinavian journal of primary health care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Knowledge, willingness, and reported prior prostate cancer testing among men in Palestine: a cross-sectional online survey.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Article
- A retrospective study of prostate-specific antigen and international prostate symptoms scores from participants at a men's health screening initiative in Trinidad.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate how GPs use the PSA test as a diagnostic tool in daily practice.
designQualitative study using focus group interviews, the transcripts being analyzed by systemic text condensation. SUBJECTS: A total of 17 Norwegian GPs in three CME groups.
main outcome measuresExploring GPs' attitudes to national guidelines and the practical use of the PSA test.
resultsDetecting prostate cancer in general practice is a common and important, but difficult diagnostic issue. Our participants experienced uncertainty regarding the test when to use it, how to interpret the results and when to refer to specialist health services.
conclusionThe study revealed a general ambivalence to the use of PSA. Many patients present urological problems, and many are afraid of having cancer. PSA is commonly used, but sometimes generates problems rather than solving them. IMPLICATIONS: The use of the PSA test should be based on a thorough clinical assessment and in close collaboration with the patient.Key pointsMany patients in general practice present urological problems, and many are afraid of having cancer.GPs have a general ambivalence to the use of PSA when to use it, how to interpret the results and when to refer to specialist health services.The use of PSA sometimes generates problems rather than solving them.
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.