Observational studyActa oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden)2025
Knowledge and understanding of information after taking decision to participate or not in a randomized trial of surgery vs radiotherapy among patients with locally advanced prostate cancer - an observational study.
Observational study in Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeInformed consent from trial participants is mandatory. In a randomized clinical trial, we investigated (1) differences in knowledge and understanding of trial information between patients who participated and those who refrained, (2) differences in perceptions of information, and (3) differences in satisfaction with the information. PATIENTS: After the decision about participation in the randomized study, 'Surgery versus radiotherapy for locally advanced prostate cancer' (SPCG-15), patients were sent questionnaires ('Quality of Informed Consent', EORTC QLQ-INFO25). Patients were categorized in 'Non-participants' or 'Participants'. RESULTS AND
interpretationA total of 80 patients (80%) responded, 68% of non-participants and 95% of participants. Between-group differences in knowledge were found for duration of the trial, insurances in the trial, and if the trial intervention had been proven to be superior. Patients had high levels of knowledge (> 80%) regarding the trial aim, that participation implied research, the right to decline, that future patients benefit from research and, of the randomization procedure. Less than 50% responded correctly concerning risks associated with the trial, the unproven nature of the trial and issues about insurances. Non-participants scored lower concerning duration of trial participation, confidentiality of medical records, treatments and procedures in the trial, and experimental nature of treatments. There were no differences regarding satisfaction with information. Non-participants and participants did not differ in satisfaction, or in knowledge and understanding of most aspects of the information. Knowledge levels were low in some areas, and thus, it seems to be room for improvement to fulfill the requirements of informed consent.
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.