Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36826123›Full record

ArticleCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2023

Encouraging Patients to Ask Questions: Development and Pilot Testing of a Question Prompt List for Patients Undergoing a Biopsy for Suspected Prostate Cancer.

Orlando Rincones, Allan 'Ben' Smith, Peter Chong, Pascal Mancuso, Verena Shuwen Wu, Mark Sidhom, Karen Wong, Diana Ngo, Paul Gassner, Afaf Girgis

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 36% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Orlando RinconesIngham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool 2170, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9727-7871
Allan 'Ben' SmithIngham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool 2170, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2496-7369
Peter ChongLake Macquarie Urology, Newcastle 2290, Australia.
Pascal MancusoLiverpool Cancer Therapy Centre, South Western Sydney Local Health District, Liverpool 2170, Australia.
Verena Shuwen WuIngham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool 2170, Australia.
Mark SidhomSouth West Sydney Clinical Campuses, UNSW Medicine & Health, University of New South Wales Sydney, Liverpool 2170, Australia.
Karen WongSouth West Sydney Clinical Campuses, UNSW Medicine & Health, University of New South Wales Sydney, Liverpool 2170, Australia.
Diana NgoLiverpool Cancer Therapy Centre, South Western Sydney Local Health District, Liverpool 2170, Australia.
Paul GassnerDepartment of Urological Surgery, South Western Sydney Local Health District, Liverpool 2170, Australia.
Afaf GirgisIngham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool 2170, Australia.
UNSW Sydney · AUSouth Western Sydney Local Health District · AUIngham Institute · AULake Macquarie Private Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study assessed the acceptability and feasibility of a question prompt list (QPL) to facilitate informed treatment decision-making in men with suspected localised prostate cancer, which involves values-based choices between options with similar efficacy but different side effects. The QPL was developed through iterative consultation with consumers, clinicians and researchers. Acceptability was assessed using study-specific questions regarding QPL satisfaction and usefulness and qualitative interviews. Feasibility was determined via the proportion of men given the QPL according to medical records and the completion of standardised measures of decisional outcomes. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive and univariate statistics. Qualitative data were thematically analysed. Fifty-two men consented; 34 provided data for analysis. The QPL recipients reported moderate-high content satisfaction (70.6%) and perceived usefulness in guiding appointments when receiving biopsy results (64.7%). Two main qualitative themes also indicated the QPL acceptability: (1) the freedom to ask-acceptable timing, flexible usage and usefulness of the QPL, and (2) satisfaction with the QPL content. However, only 18.4% of eligible men received the QPL, indicating limited feasibility. The QPL is safe and acceptable, but further research is needed regarding how to facilitate the uptake of the question prompt list in clinical practice.

Indexed as

CommunicationProstatic NeoplasmsHumansMalePhysician-Patient RelationsReferral and ConsultationSurveys and Questionnairesprostate biopsyprostate cancerquestion prompt listtreatment decision-making

Identifiers

PMID36826123
PMCPMC9954987
OpenAlexW4319750608

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.