ReviewCanadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada2022
Systematic review of interventions that improve provider compliance to imaging guidelines for prostate cancer.
Review in Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Using real-world, population-level data to assess the uptake of active surveillance for low-grade prostate cancer before and after the release of clinical guidelines.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2025Article
- Appropriateness of Imaging for Low-Risk Prostate Cancer-Real World Data from the Pennsylvania Urologic Regional Collaboration (PURC).Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRadiographic staging with bone scan or computed tomography is not indicated for men with low-risk prostate cancer. Physician compliance with these imaging recommendations has been widely variable, leading to inappropriate testing and increased costs. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify and learn from interventions associated with improved physician compliance to imaging guidelines for prostate cancer staging.
methodsThis systematic review followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed was searched through January 2022 for the following medical subject headings (MeSH) terms: ('practice patterns, physicians' or 'guideline adherence' or 'unnecessary procedures' or 'quality improvement') and ('prostatic neoplasms/diagnostic imaging'). Inclusion required discussion of an intervention for physician compliance to prostate cancer imaging guidelines and specific data describing associated outcomes. Publications focused on other malignancies or without this intervention, evaluation, or data were excluded.
resultsOf 82 papers screened, only five met inclusion criteria - representing 12 802 patients. Each focused on reducing unnecessary imaging and demonstrated statistically significant post-intervention improvement of physician compliance to imaging guidelines for staging prostate cancer. Four were multidimensional, with education, clinical champions, and performance feedback. One used the unidimensional intervention of an electronic medical record (EMR)-based clinical reminder order check (CROC). No studies used randomization or a control group.
conclusionsPost-intervention improvement in physician compliance to imaging guidelines for staging prostate cancer has been associated with EMR-based CROC and combination interventions using clinical champions, education, and feedback. This has been observed at individual institutions and larger organizations spanning a region or state.
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.