Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36062629›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical screening2022

Screening asymptomatic men for prostate cancer: A comparison of international guidelines on prostate-specific antigen testing.

Sherena D Jackson, May R de la Rue, Thomas Pl Greenslade, Anna M John, Shahida Wahid, Richard M Martin, Naomi J Williams, Emma L Turner

Abstract readLetter
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical screening, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Guidelines by Urologists and Public Health Professionals: Different Perspectives on Prostate Specific Antigen Screening.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2023
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Sherena D JacksonBristol Medical School, 1980University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5989-5318
May R de la RueBristol Medical School, 1980University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK.
Thomas Pl GreensladeBristol Medical School, 1980University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK.
Anna M JohnBristol Medical School, 1980University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK.
Shahida WahidBristol Medical School, 1980University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4950-5926
Richard M MartinBristol Medical School, 1980University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7992-7719
Naomi J WilliamsBristol Medical School, 1980University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK.
Emma L TurnerBristol Medical School, 1980University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK.

Funding

Cancer Research UK 29019Cancer Research UK C11043/A4286Cancer Research UK C18281/A11326Cancer Research UK C18281/A15064Cancer Research UK C18281/A24432Cancer Research UK C18281/A29019Cancer Research UK C18281/A8145
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo summarise and compare the key recommendations on prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening for prostate cancer, and so highlight where more evidence is required to facilitate consistent recommendations.

methodsThe Medline database and websites of 18 national screening organisations and professional associations were searched between January 2010 and November 2020 to identify screening guidelines published in English, considering recent clinical trials.

resultsPopulation-based PSA testing of asymptomatic men is not widely recommended. Guidelines emphasize shared patient-clinician decision making. For 'average-risk' men choosing to be screened, the recommended age varies from 50-55 to 70 years, alongside consideration of life expectancy (ranging from 7-15 years). Screening intervals, when specified, are biennial (most common), annual, or determined from baseline PSA. The earliest age for screening high-risk men (frequently defined as of African descent or with a family history of prostate cancer) is 40 years, but recommendations often defer to clinical judgement.

conclusionsPopulation screening of asymptomatic men is not widely recommended. Instead, balancing the potential harms and benefits of PSA testing is endorsed. Variation between guidelines stems from differing interpretations of key trials and could lead to clinician-dependent screening views. The development of clinical decision aids and international consensus on guidelines may help reduce national and international variation on how men are counselled.

Indexed as

Prostate-Specific AntigenProstatic NeoplasmsAdultEarly Detection of CancerHumansMaleMass ScreeningProstate-Specific Antigencancer screeningguidelinesinternational comparisonprostate cancerProstate-specific antigen (PSA)

Identifiers

PMID36062629
PMCPMC9574423

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.