ArticleAnnals of family medicine
Patient Communication Preferences for Prostate Cancer Screening Discussions: A Scoping Review.
Article in Annals of family medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Evidence-based Prostate Cancer Screening Interventions for Black Men: A Systematic Review.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2025Pooled it
- Prevalence and determinants of shared decision-making for PSA testing in the United States.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2025Article
- An overview of utilizing artificial intelligence in localized prostate cancer imaging.Expert review of medical devices · 2025Review
- Patient and physician treatment preferences in relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma: a discrete choice experiment in the United States, United Kingdom, France, Germany, Brazil, and Japan.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Sentiment analysis of cancer screening in Chinese social media: Qualitative studies based on machine learning.PloS one · 2025Article
- Association of genetically instrumented HMGCR inhibition with the therapeutic role of prostate cancer: a Mendelian randomization study and supportingFrontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeProstate cancer screening guidelines have changed as new evidence showing an equivocal mortality benefit led many organizations to relax recommendations for this screening and instead suggest shared decision making. Presently, it is unknown how successfully these conversations happen. Our objective was to understand men's communication preferences when they discuss prostate cancer screening.
methodsIn this scoping review, we searched 4 electronic databases (Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL) and the gray literature. Additional studies were obtained from reference lists of included studies and relevant review articles. We included qualitative studies reporting patient perspectives relevant to the research question and published in English. Two independent researchers screened titles and abstracts based on these criteria, conducted a full-text review for final inclusion, evaluated the remaining articles for validity, extracted data, and used thematic analysis to build a thematic framework. A subgroup analysis was performed for Black men as many studies elicited their perspectives.
resultsAnalyses were based on 29 studies. We identified 4 main themes that men described as critical for successful prostate cancer screening risk discussions with their primary care clinician: using everyday language, receiving a sufficient quantity of information, spending enough time, and having a trusting and respectful relationship. Three additional themes emerged that prohibited men from having any discussions at all: having already decided to pursue prostate cancer screening, being passive in medical encounters, and perceiving threat to one's well-being. Black men faced racism, which impacted medical interactions.
conclusionsOur findings point to strategies to support men's communication preferences and address preconceptions surrounding prostate cancer screening. More studies are needed in certain underrepresented populations given the propensity for disparity in health outcomes.
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.