ArticleProstate cancer and prostatic diseases2025
Variation in communication of side effects in prostate cancer treatment consultations.
Article in Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Beyond satisfaction scores: quantifying communication quality in oncology care.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2026Article
- Development and validation of a natural language processing system to assess quality of physician communication in prostate cancer consultations.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2026Article
- Scoring Physician Risk Communication in Prostate Cancer Using Large Language Models.Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing. Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing · 2026Article
- Topic Mapping to Inform Content to Discuss in Shared Decision-Making for Prostate Cancer.Urology · 2025Article
- Scoring Physician Risk Communication in Prostate Cancer Using Large Language Models.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Assessing delays in accessing and completing radiotherapy for cervical cancer treatment: A multicenter survey of oncology providers in go further-funded countries in Sub-Saharan Africa.Gynecologic oncology reports · 2025Article
- Use of Persuasive Language in Communication of Risk during Prostate Cancer Treatment Consultations.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEffective communication of treatment side effects (SE) is critical for shared decision-making (SDM) in localized prostate cancer. We sought to qualitatively characterize how physicians communicate SE in consultations.
methodsWe transcribed 50 initial prostate cancer treatment consultations across nine multidisciplinary providers (Urologists, Radiation Oncologists, Medical Oncologists) at our tertiary referral, academic center. Coders identified quotes describing SE and used an inductive approach to establish a hierarchy for granularity of communication: (1) not mentioned, (2) name only, (3) generalization("high"), (4) average incidence without timepoint, (5) average incidence with timepoint, and (6) precision estimate. We reported the most granular mode of communication for each SE throughout the consultation overall and across specialty and tumor risk.
resultsAmong consultations discussing surgery (n = 40), erectile dysfunction (ED) and urinary incontinence (UI) were omitted in 15% and 12%, not quantified (name only or generalization) in 47% and 30%, and noted as average incidence without timeline in 8% and 8%, respectively. In only 30% and 49% were ED and UI quantified with timeline (average incidence with timeline or precision estimate), respectively. Among consultations discussing radiation (n = 36), irritative urinary symptoms, ED, and other post-radiotherapy SE were omitted in 22%, 42%, and 64-67%, not quantified in 61%, 33%, and 23-28%, and noted as average incidence without timeline in 8%, 22%, and 6-8%, respectively. In only 3-8% were post-radiotherapy SE quantified with timeline. Specialty concordance (but not tumor risk) was associated with higher granularity of communication, though physicians frequently failed to quantify specialty-concordant SE.
conclusionsSE was often omitted, not quantified, and/or lacked a timeline in treatment consultations in our sample. Physicians should articulate, quantify, and assign a timeline for SE to optimize SDM.
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.