Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41972986›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical screening2026

Screening for prostate cancer.

Jonathan P Bestwick, Nicholas J Wald

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical screening, 2026. 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

2 authors.

Jonathan P BestwickClinical Haematology, Royal London Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3088-8616
Nicholas J WaldUCL Institute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1676-5908

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in UK men excluding non-melanoma skin cancer, with over 64,000 new cases and 12,000 deaths annually. This disparity between incidence and mortality has fuelled debate about over-diagnosis and the value of screening. The UK National Screening Committee has advised against population prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening, citing uncertainty regarding benefit and harm. However, a risk-based PSA screening algorithm that adjusts PSA levels to multiples of the median for the same age and incorporates age-specific risk demonstrated good screening performance (detection rate of 90% for a false-positive rate of 2%). The European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer shows a 16% reduction in prostate cancer mortality with PSA screening, comparable to reductions achieved in bowel cancer screening. The addition of pre-biopsy multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) screening reduces unnecessary biopsies and over-diagnosis while maintaining detection of clinically significant disease. Together, risk-based PSA testing combined with multi-parametric MRI would prevent an estimated 13 prostate cancer deaths per 1000 men screened every 5 years from age 55, with 9 deaths prevented for every man treated unnecessarily.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerMass ScreeningProstatic NeoplasmsHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleProstate-Specific AntigenProstate-Specific AntigenProstate cancer screeningprostate-specific antigenPSA

Identifiers

PMID41972986
PMCPMC13201888

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.