Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35898187›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2022

Men's experiences of receiving a prostate cancer diagnosis after opportunistic screening-A qualitative descriptive secondary analysis.

Linda Gellerstedt, Ann Langius-Eklöf, Nazmije Kelmendi, Kay Sundberg, Åsa G Craftman

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Men's experiences of receiving a prostate cancer diagnosis after opportunistic screening-A qualitative descriptive secondary analysis.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Linda GellerstedtDepartment of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Division of Nursing, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Ann Langius-EklöfDepartment of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Division of Nursing, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Nazmije KelmendiDepartment of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Division of Nursing, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Kay SundbergDepartment of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Division of Nursing, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-4544-9798
Åsa G CraftmanDepartment of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Division of Nursing, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-0553-199X
Karolinska Institutet · SESophiahemmet University College · SEStockholm County Council · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundProstate cancer is one of the most common types of cancer in men and could occur without symptoms. Screening has been debated but remains controversial and, in most countries, organized population-based screening does not exist. The aim of this study was to describe men's experiences of receiving a prostate cancer diagnosis after opportunistic screening.

methodsThis study is a secondary analysis from interviews with 17 men (aged 56-80 years) who had undergone curative treatment for prostate cancer. Data were collected in an urban region of Sweden through interviews conducted face to face or by telephone. An inductive content analysis was used with Consolidated criteria for Reporting Qualitative research as a reporting checklist.

resultsTwo main categories were identified. Screening is a lifesaver enclosed by ethical dilemmas reflects how men considered screening as a lifesaving test. Testing was surrounded by injustice and an eagerness to encourage other men to undergo screening. Facing challenges during diagnosis reflects the men's experiences of being in an unknown field yet expected to engage in decision-making concerning appropriate treatment. Receiving the diagnosis rendered mixed emotions about having a cancer disease, that the treatment could cause lifelong symptom distress and the men described being hesitant to talk about their diagnosis.

conclusionsThe findings highlight men's opinions about screening and that the lack of routine screening represents injustice. The men considered this as an ethical question of lifesaving justice, while stakeholders may argue that screening could lead to unnecessary suffering and overtreatment. Men do not always talk openly about their diagnosis, linked to the fact that it concerns intimate areas. It is important to balance the information in relation to shared decision-making regarding treatment. Health care professionals have an ethical responsibility to support and coach the patient in their decision. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This study was based on interviews with men who had experienced a diagnosis of prostate cancer.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerProstatic NeoplasmsHumansMaleMass ScreeningQualitative ResearchSwedenexperiencesopportunistic screeningprostate cancerqualitative researchsecondary analysis

Identifiers

PMID35898187
PMCPMC9615043
OpenAlexW4288077564

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.