Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40478531›Full record

SynthesisEuropean journal of public health2025

Informing prostate cancer screening policy makers in the European Union: lessons from cancer screening governance and policymaking.

Sarah Collen, Arunah Chandran, Paolo Guglielmetti, Ondřej Májek, Monique J Roobol, Hendrik Van Poppel, Sergio Torres-Rueda

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European journal of public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Sarah CollenPolicy Office , European Association of Urology, Arnhem, The Netherlands.
Arunah ChandranInternational Agency for Research on Cancer/World Health Organization, Lyon, France.
Paolo GuglielmettiFormer: European Commission's Directorate-General for Health and Food Safety (DG SANTE), Luxembourg.
Ondřej MájekNational Screening Centre, Institute of Health Information and Statistics of the Czech Republic, Prague, Czech Republic.
Monique J RoobolDepartment of Urology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Hendrik Van PoppelPolicy Office , European Association of Urology, Arnhem, The Netherlands.
Sergio Torres-RuedaLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

European Association of UrologyEuropean Association of Urology Policy OfficeWorld Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prostate cancer (PCa) poses a significant global health threat, with high incidence and mortality rates. In 2022, the Council of the European Union (EU) updated its screening recommendations, prioritizing PCa screening. This signals a crucial step towards establishing new early detection programmes in EU member states. This study investigates the role of policy makers and governance in cancer screening to inform the development of PCa screening. We had a mixed-method study design. First, a rapid review was conducted on policy making and governance in EU-funded cancer screening initiatives. Second, a focus group discussion reviewed study concepts and methods. Third, a systematic literature review was performed and, fourth, a series of in-depth interviews with actors involved in PCa screening pilots was conducted. Data were analysed thematically and the findings are used to propose 10 recommendations for policy makers. The results of the rapid review and focus group discussion framed the study in the context of existing cancer screening programmes across the EU, and highlighted what already exists in terms of governance tools and methodology. The literature review and in-depth interviews presented key learnings from the literature and real-life settings. These findings are reported using a pre-existing conceptional framework for effective health system governance. The study underscores the critical importance of governance in effective cancer screening programmes. Ten recommendations are proposed, including: defining cancer screening governance, allocating budgets and defining common approaches and key performance indicators for evaluation, establishing methods to enhance citizen participation, and reinforcing network governance.

Indexed as

Administrative PersonnelEarly Detection of CancerHealth PolicyMass ScreeningPolicy MakingProstatic NeoplasmsEuropean UnionFocus GroupsHumansMale

Identifiers

PMID40478531
PMCPMC12198752

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.