ArticleUrology practice2021
Assessing Quality and Safety of an Advanced Practice Provider-led Active Surveillance Clinic for Men with Prostate Cancer.
Article in Urology practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Key Determinants Influencing Treatment Decision-Making for and Adherence to Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: We implemented an advanced practice provider (APP)-led clinic to aid in managing the growing population of men on active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer. Our objective was to evaluate the quality and safety of an established APP-led AS clinic by comparing outcomes with urologist-led biopsies, defined in terms of adherence to scheduled visits and biopsy complications. Materials and Methods: We performed a retrospective review of 2341 consecutive patients treated in an AS clinic at a high-volume referral center between 2000-2019. We examined the rate of no-show or same-day cancellation of visits for APPs versus urologists and compared the risk of biopsy complications between these providers. Generalized estimating equations were used to account for repeated visits and biopsies. Results: There were significantly more no-shows at APP visits (odds ratio [OR] 1.40, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.16-1.70, Conclusions: We demonstrated that in an established APP-led AS clinic at a high-volume center, APPs achieved acceptable patient adherence to scheduled visits and biopsy complications. Because patients were not continuously managed by one type of provider, further prospective studies are needed to establish equivalent pathologic outcomes in APP-managed AS.
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.