Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37475511›Full record

ArticleCancer medicine2023

Health care delivery system contributions to management of newly diagnosed prostate cancer.

Noah Krampe, Samuel R Kaufman, Mary K Oerline, Dawson Hill, Megan E V Caram, Vahakn B Shahinian, Brent K Hollenbeck, Avinash Maganty

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

8 authors.

Noah KrampeDow Division of Health Services Research, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Samuel R KaufmanDow Division of Health Services Research, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Mary K OerlineDow Division of Health Services Research, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Dawson HillDow Division of Health Services Research, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Megan E V CaramDivision of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Vahakn B ShahinianDow Division of Health Services Research, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Brent K HollenbeckDow Division of Health Services Research, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Avinash MagantyDow Division of Health Services Research, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6436-6667

Funding

Aligning financial incentives to promote rational use of active surveillance for prostate cancerR01CA269367 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI BRENT K. HOLLENBECK, VAHAKN B SHAHINIAN · 2022 to 2026
$2.8M
Impact of the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System on the Quality of Prostate Cancer CareF32CA275021 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI MAGANTY, AVINASH · 2022 to 2022
$86k
NCI NIH HHS F32 CA275021NCI NIH HHS R01 CA269367
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite clinical guidelines advocating for use of conservative management in specific clinical scenarios for men with prostate cancer, there continues to be tremendous variation in its uptake. This variation may be amplified among men with competing health risks, for whom treatment decisions are not straightforward. The degree to which characteristics of the health care delivery system explain this variation remains unclear.

methodsUsing national Medicare data, men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer between 2014 and 2019 were identified. Hierarchical logistic regression models were used to assess the association between use of treatment and health care delivery system determinants operating at the practice level, which included measures of financial incentives (i.e., radiation vault ownership), practice organization (i.e., single specialty vs. multispecialty groups), and the health care market (i.e., competition). Variance was partitioned to estimate the relative influence of patient and practice characteristics on the variation in use of treatment within strata of noncancer mortality risk groups.

resultsAmong 62,507 men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer, the largest variation in the use of treatment between practices was observed for men with high and very high-risk of noncancer mortality (range of practice-level rates of treatment for high: 57%-71% and very high: 41%-61%). Addition of health care delivery system determinants measured at the practice level explained 13% and 15% of the variation in use of treatment among men with low and intermediate risk of noncancer mortality in 10 years, respectively. Conversely, these characteristics explained a larger share of the variation in use of treatment among men with high and very high-risk of noncancer mortality (26% and 40%, respectively).

conclusionsVariation among urology practices in use of treatment was highest for men with high and very high-risk noncancer mortality. Practice characteristics explained a large share of this variation.

Indexed as

MedicareProstatic NeoplasmsAgedConservative TreatmentHumansMalePractice Patterns, Physicians'Risk FactorsUnited Statesdelivery systemprostate cancervariation in treatment

Identifiers

PMID37475511
PMCPMC10501260

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.