Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36289518›Full record

ArticleSystematic reviews2022

Screening for prostate cancer: protocol for updating multiple systematic reviews to inform a Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care guideline update.

Alexandria Bennett, Andrew Beck, Nicole Shaver, Roland Grad, Allana LeBlanc, Heather Limburg, Casey Gray, Ahmed Abou-Setta, Scott Klarenbach, Navindra Persaud and 13 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic reviews, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

23 authors.

Alexandria Bennett *School of Epidemiology and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. d.bennett@uottawa.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-5977-2094
Andrew Beck *School of Epidemiology and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-8308-2202
Nicole ShaverSchool of Epidemiology and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Roland GradDepartment of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Allana LeBlancGlobal Health and Guidelines Division, Public Health Agency of Canada, Ottawa, Canada.
Heather LimburgGlobal Health and Guidelines Division, Public Health Agency of Canada, Ottawa, Canada.
Casey GrayGlobal Health and Guidelines Division, Public Health Agency of Canada, Ottawa, Canada.
Ahmed Abou-SettaDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Max Rady College of Medicine, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
Scott KlarenbachDepartment of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Navindra PersaudDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Guylène ThériaultDepartment of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Brett D ThombsLady Davis Institute of the Jewish General Hospital and Faculty of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Keith J ToddDepartment of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Neil BellDepartment of Family Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Philipp DahmUrology Section, Minneapolis VA Healthcare System and Department of Urology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.
Andrew LoblawEvaluative Clinical Sciences, Odette Cancer Research Program, Sunnybrook Research Institute, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Lisa Del GiudiceDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Xiaomei YaoDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Becky SkidmoreIndependent Information Specialist, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Elizabeth Rolland-HarrisGlobal Health and Guidelines Division, Public Health Agency of Canada, Ottawa, Canada.
Melissa BrouwersSchool of Epidemiology and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Julian LittleSchool of Epidemiology and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
David MoherSchool of Epidemiology and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-2434-4206

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo inform updated recommendations by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care on screening for prostate cancer in adults aged 18 years and older in primary care. This protocol outlines the planned scope and methods for a series of systematic reviews.

methodsUpdates of two systematic reviews and a de novo review will be conducted to synthesize the evidence on the benefits and harms of screening for prostate cancer with a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and/or digital rectal examination (DRE) (with or without additional information) and patient values and preferences. Outcomes for the benefits of screening include reduced prostate cancer mortality, all-cause mortality, and incidence of metastatic prostate cancer. Outcomes for the harms of screening include false-positive screening tests, overdiagnosis, complications due to biopsy, and complications of treatment including incontinence (urinary or bowel), and erectile dysfunction. The quality of life or functioning (overall and disease-specific) and psychological effects outcomes are considered as a possible benefit or harm. Outcomes for the values and preferences review include quantitative or qualitative information regarding the choice to screen or intention to undergo screening. For the reviews on benefits or harms, we will search for randomized controlled trials, quasi-randomized, and controlled studies in MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. For the review on values and preferences, we will search for experimental or observational studies in MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycInfo. For all reviews, we will also search websites of relevant organizations, gray literature, and reference lists of included studies. Title and abstract screening, full-text review, data extraction, and risk of bias assessments will be completed independently by pairs of reviewers with any disagreements resolved by consensus or by consulting with a third reviewer. The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach will be used to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. DISCUSSION: The series of systematic reviews will be used by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care to update their 2014 guideline on screening for prostate cancer in adults aged 18 years and older. Systematic review registration This review has been registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022314407) and is available on the Open Science Framework (osf.io/dm32k).

Indexed as

Prostate-Specific AntigenProstatic NeoplasmsAdultCanadaEarly Detection of CancerHumansMaleMass ScreeningQuality of LifeReview Literature as TopicSystematic Reviews as TopicProstate-Specific AntigenAdultsGuidelinePrimary careProstate cancerProstate-specific antigenScreeningSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID36289518
PMCPMC9609189

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.