ArticleJournal of racial and ethnic health disparities2026
Shared Decision-Making for Prostate Cancer Screening in Racial and Ethnic Minority Populations: A Systematic Review.
Article in Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities, 2026. 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
objectivesProstate cancer screening (PCS) remains controversial in its efficacy, making shared decision-making (SDM) essential to ensure informed choices. However, racial and ethnic minority men in the United States experience persistent disparities in PCS participation and outcomes. Despite these disparities, how SDM interventions have been designed, implemented, and evaluated for these populations remains unclear. To address this gap, this systematic review examined SDM interventions for PCS among minority men, with a specific focus on the extent to which interventions incorporated key SDM features (information exchange, deliberation, and decision implementation).
methodSix databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Scopus) were used to search for U.S.-based, English-language studies published in the past ten years. We included studies that evaluated SDM interventions for PCS among racial and ethnic minority men.
resultsEighteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Most targeted African American men, with limited racial/ethnic diversity. The majority of interventions were delivered as single-session programs. While all studies supported information exchange, few incorporated the full spectrum of SDM components. Outcome measures were inconsistent across studies, and critical variables relevant to minority populations, such as trust in healthcare, were not assessed.
conclusionsThese findings illustrate ongoing challenges in both the design and evaluation of SDM interventions, including limited application of core SDM features and lack of population diversity. This review calls for future studies to develop and test culturally adapted, multi-component SDM interventions. Such efforts are needed to advance SDM research and ultimately contribute to more equitable, patient-centered cancer care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42143174What 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.