ArticleRevista de saude publica2022
Decision aid for prostate cancer screening in Brazil.
Article in Revista de saude publica, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo present the development and validation processes of a decision aid for prostate cancer screening in Brazil.
methodsStudy with qualitative-participatory design for the elaboration of a decision aid for prostate cancer screening, with the participation of a group of men and physicians inserted in primary health care in 11 Brazilian states. Evidence synthesis, field testing, and use in clinical scenarios were performed to adapt the content, format, language, and applicability towards the needs of the target audience in the years 2018 and 2019. The versions were subsequently evaluated by the participants and modified based on the data obtained.
resultsWe elaborated an unprecedented tool in Brazil, with information about the tests used in the screening, comparison of their possible benefits and harms and a numerical infographic with the consequences of this practice. We verified the decision aid usability to assist in the communication between the doctor and the man in the context of primary health care, besides identifying the need for greater discussion about sharing decisions in clinical scenarios.
conclusionThe tool was easy to use, objective, and has little interference in consultation time. It is a technical-scientific material, produced by research, with the participation of its main target audience and which is available free of charge for use in Brazilian clinical scenarios.
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.