ArticleUrologic oncology2025
Exploring prostate-specific antigen (PSA) Testing rates and screening disparities in the all of us dataset.
Article in Urologic oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- FGF19 in Solid Tumors: Molecular Mechanisms, Metabolic Reprogramming, and Emerging Therapeutic Opportunities.Theranostics · 2026Review
- Article
- Understanding Drivers of Prostate Cancer Screening in Mexican-Origin Men Along the U.S./Mexico Border Region.American journal of men's healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo examine prostate cancer (PCa) screening disparities among ethnic groups in the U.S. using the All of Us database. MATERIAL AND
methodsWhite, Black, Hispanic, and Asian males ≥ 40 years old were included, excluding diagnosis's that conflict with PCa screening. We analyzed prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening rates by age based on American Urological Association guidelines, using multivariable logistic regression (MLR) and a Cox time-to-event models that considered race, age, income, education, insurance, and home ownership as independent variables. Initial screening ages and biopsy rates were also compared.
resultsOf 56,473 individuals, 18,088 had PSA measurements: 74% White, 15% Black, 9% Hispanic, and 2% Asian. Hispanic (20%) and Black (21%) minorities were less likely to undergo PSA screening compared to White men (39%, P < 0.001). However, minorities had their initial PSA earlier with their first test from 53-54 years old compared to White men at 58 years (P < 0.001). MLR revealed race, age, income, education, insurance type, and home ownership as screening predictors (P < 0.001). Screened Black men had higher odds of an elevated PSA (P < 0.001), but the likelihood of receiving a biopsy postelevated PSA did not significantly differ from White men (P = 0.821). Additionally, those screened at age ≥ 70 were more likely to be White, have at least a college education, and be homeowners (P < 0.001).
conclusionsWhite men, despite starting at a later age, are screened with PSAs more frequently than minorities, and often undergo screening at older ages outside the recommended guidelines. Black men did not have a higher rate of biopsy after having an elevated PSA compared to White men.
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.