| Title |
Factors that influence patient preferences for prostate cancer management options: a systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient preference and adherence, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ppa.s83333 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Timothy N Showalter, Mark V Mishra, John FP Bridges |
| Abstract |
We performed a systematic review to evaluate evidence regarding factors that influence patient preferences for management options for localized prostate cancer. We followed a prespecified search protocol (PROSPERO identifier CRD42014009173) to identify studies that evaluated patient preferences for prostate cancer management options for localized prostate cancer. We queried PubMed, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) Plus, and Econ-Lit databases. Two separate reviewers completed the article selection process and review, including coding of study characteristics. Study quality was scored according to the PREFS checklist, which consists of five criteria: Purpose, Respondents, Explanation, Findings, and Significance. Reviewers summarized the primary findings of each article included in the analysis. Of the 606 citations identified in the literature search, there were a total of 21 articles that met all selection criteria, reporting results for a total of 4,131 subjects. Themes identified in the studies included: the importance of patient perceptions of treatment efficacy and side effects; the influence of physician recommendations on patient decision-making; and the prioritization of concerns regarding treatment side effects among those men who prefer radiation therapy or active surveillance. The articles had an average PREFS score of 3.4 (standard deviation [SD] 1.0), which is similar to a recent study for breast cancer treatment preferences. This systematic review of factors that influence patient preferences for prostate cancer management options identified a small, but high quality, group of articles that satisfied the selection criteria. The available evidence suggests that interventions aimed at informing patients regarding the comparative effectiveness of prostate cancer management alternatives should include the influence of physician recommendations and family members' desires on patient decision-making. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Dominican Republic | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Indonesia | 1 | 1% |
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 81 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 12 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 14% |
| Researcher | 10 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 11% |
| Professor | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 19 | 23% |
| Unknown | 16 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 31% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 12% |
| Psychology | 7 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 13 | 15% |
| Unknown | 21 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 December 2015.
All research outputs
#8,616,072
of 25,576,801 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#629
of 1,733 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#95,424
of 277,879 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#15
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,576,801 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,733 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 277,879 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.