Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38671083›Full record

ArticleProstate cancer and prostatic diseases2025

Prevalence and determinants of shared decision-making for PSA testing in the United States.

Naeem Bhojani, Larry E Miller, Kevin C Zorn, Bilal Chughtai, Dean S Elterman, Samir Bhattacharyya, Ben H Chew

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  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

7 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Naeem BhojaniDivision of Urology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2679-2635
Larry E MillerDepartment of Biostatistics, Miller Scientific, Johnson City, TN, USA. larry@millerscientific.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1594-1885
Kevin C ZornDivision of Urology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3651-6669
Bilal ChughtaiDepartment of Urology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Dean S EltermanDivision of Urology, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1507-7783
Samir BhattacharyyaHealth Economics and Market Access, Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA, USA.
Ben H ChewDepartment of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Centre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal · CABoston Scientific (United States) · USCornell University · USGeneral Mills (United States) · USUniversity Health Network · CAUniversity of British Columbia · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundShared decision-making (SDM) is recommended for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing but appears underutilized. This population-based study assessed the prevalence and determinants of SDM for PSA testing among US men.

methodsWe assessed PSA testing rates and SDM engagement in men aged 40 and older without prostate cancer history using the 2019 National Health Interview Survey. SDM was defined as discussing the advantages and disadvantages of PSA testing with a physician. We used multivariable logistic regression with machine learning to identify factors associated with lack of SDM.

resultsAmong 9723 eligible participants (mean age 58 years), lifetime PSA testing prevalence was 45.9% and the 1-year testing incidence was 29.1%. Only 24.1% reported engaging in SDM with a physician, while 62.9% never discussed PSA testing. Younger age and lower education levels were the primary determinants of decreased SDM engagement. Men with less education engaged in SDM less than half as often as those with higher education levels across all age groups.

conclusionsSocietal guidelines recommend SDM for PSA testing. However, most men, regardless of age, have never engaged in SDM conversations with a healthcare provider about PSA testing, especially those with less education. More efforts are needed to improve patient-provider conversations about the potential benefits and harms of PSA testing.

Indexed as

Decision Making, SharedEarly Detection of CancerPatient ParticipationProstate-Specific AntigenProstatic NeoplasmsAdultAgedHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrevalenceUnited StatesProstate-Specific Antigen

Identifiers

PMID38671083
OpenAlexW4395669138

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.