Efficacy of decision aid delivery modes in prostate cancer screening: umbrella review and network meta‐analysis
Objective To review and compare the efficacy of different delivery modes of decision aids (DAs), including computer‐based, print‐based, multimedia‐based, video‐based, and website‐based on decision‐making outcomes for prostate cancer screening compared to usual care (UC) and among the delivery modes....
Saved in:
Published in | BJU international Vol. 135; no. 2; pp. 222 - 234 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
England
Wiley Subscription Services, Inc
01.02.2025
John Wiley and Sons Inc |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
ISSN | 1464-4096 1464-410X 1464-410X |
DOI | 10.1111/bju.16545 |
Cover
Loading…
Abstract | Objective
To review and compare the efficacy of different delivery modes of decision aids (DAs), including computer‐based, print‐based, multimedia‐based, video‐based, and website‐based on decision‐making outcomes for prostate cancer screening compared to usual care (UC) and among the delivery modes.
Methods
PubMed, the Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Google Advanced Search, and Turning Research Into Practice (TRIP) Database were systematically searched from inception to August 2023. The primary outcomes were knowledge level, knowledge scores, participation in shared decision‐making (SDM), decisional conflict, and preference for SDM participation. Secondary outcomes were the proportion of subjects who underwent screening (actual screening utilisation) and the proportion of subjects who intended to be screened (intention to undergo screening). Network and pairwise meta‐analyses were performed using random‐effects models.
Results
Seven systematic reviews were included. Network meta‐analysis found that multimedia (relative risk [RR] 1.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02–2.24), print (RR 1.82, 95% CI 1.23–2.69), and website‐based (RR 1.99, 95% CI 1.32–3.01) DAs significantly increased participation in SDM compared to the computer‐based DA. There was a significant reduction in the actual screening utilisation in the computer DA arm compared to the other delivery modes. No significant differences between all delivery modes were noted on knowledge levels, knowledge scores, decisional conflict, preference for SDM participation, and intention to undergo screening. The highest mean surface under the cumulative ranking curve for all primary outcomes showed that website‐based was the most effective delivery mode, followed by print‐based DA. The pairwise meta‐analysis showed a significant increase in participants’ knowledge level, knowledge scores, a reduced intention to undergo screening and actual screening utilisation compared to UC.
Conclusions
The findings suggest that different types of DAs have varying levels of effectiveness in increasing knowledge level, knowledge scores, participation in SDM, and influencing screening behaviours. While website‐based DA appeared the most effective, employing the print‐based DA could be a practical solution in settings with limited resources. |
---|---|
AbstractList | To review and compare the efficacy of different delivery modes of decision aids (DAs), including computer-based, print-based, multimedia-based, video-based, and website-based on decision-making outcomes for prostate cancer screening compared to usual care (UC) and among the delivery modes.
PubMed, the Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Google Advanced Search, and Turning Research Into Practice (TRIP) Database were systematically searched from inception to August 2023. The primary outcomes were knowledge level, knowledge scores, participation in shared decision-making (SDM), decisional conflict, and preference for SDM participation. Secondary outcomes were the proportion of subjects who underwent screening (actual screening utilisation) and the proportion of subjects who intended to be screened (intention to undergo screening). Network and pairwise meta-analyses were performed using random-effects models.
Seven systematic reviews were included. Network meta-analysis found that multimedia (relative risk [RR] 1.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02-2.24), print (RR 1.82, 95% CI 1.23-2.69), and website-based (RR 1.99, 95% CI 1.32-3.01) DAs significantly increased participation in SDM compared to the computer-based DA. There was a significant reduction in the actual screening utilisation in the computer DA arm compared to the other delivery modes. No significant differences between all delivery modes were noted on knowledge levels, knowledge scores, decisional conflict, preference for SDM participation, and intention to undergo screening. The highest mean surface under the cumulative ranking curve for all primary outcomes showed that website-based was the most effective delivery mode, followed by print-based DA. The pairwise meta-analysis showed a significant increase in participants' knowledge level, knowledge scores, a reduced intention to undergo screening and actual screening utilisation compared to UC.
The findings suggest that different types of DAs have varying levels of effectiveness in increasing knowledge level, knowledge scores, participation in SDM, and influencing screening behaviours. While website-based DA appeared the most effective, employing the print-based DA could be a practical solution in settings with limited resources. To review and compare the efficacy of different delivery modes of decision aids (DAs), including computer-based, print-based, multimedia-based, video-based, and website-based on decision-making outcomes for prostate cancer screening compared to usual care (UC) and among the delivery modes.OBJECTIVETo review and compare the efficacy of different delivery modes of decision aids (DAs), including computer-based, print-based, multimedia-based, video-based, and website-based on decision-making outcomes for prostate cancer screening compared to usual care (UC) and among the delivery modes.PubMed, the Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Google Advanced Search, and Turning Research Into Practice (TRIP) Database were systematically searched from inception to August 2023. The primary outcomes were knowledge level, knowledge scores, participation in shared decision-making (SDM), decisional conflict, and preference for SDM participation. Secondary outcomes were the proportion of subjects who underwent screening (actual screening utilisation) and the proportion of subjects who intended to be screened (intention to undergo screening). Network and pairwise meta-analyses were performed using random-effects models.METHODSPubMed, the Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Google Advanced Search, and Turning Research Into Practice (TRIP) Database were systematically searched from inception to August 2023. The primary outcomes were knowledge level, knowledge scores, participation in shared decision-making (SDM), decisional conflict, and preference for SDM participation. Secondary outcomes were the proportion of subjects who underwent screening (actual screening utilisation) and the proportion of subjects who intended to be screened (intention to undergo screening). Network and pairwise meta-analyses were performed using random-effects models.Seven systematic reviews were included. Network meta-analysis found that multimedia (relative risk [RR] 1.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02-2.24), print (RR 1.82, 95% CI 1.23-2.69), and website-based (RR 1.99, 95% CI 1.32-3.01) DAs significantly increased participation in SDM compared to the computer-based DA. There was a significant reduction in the actual screening utilisation in the computer DA arm compared to the other delivery modes. No significant differences between all delivery modes were noted on knowledge levels, knowledge scores, decisional conflict, preference for SDM participation, and intention to undergo screening. The highest mean surface under the cumulative ranking curve for all primary outcomes showed that website-based was the most effective delivery mode, followed by print-based DA. The pairwise meta-analysis showed a significant increase in participants' knowledge level, knowledge scores, a reduced intention to undergo screening and actual screening utilisation compared to UC.RESULTSSeven systematic reviews were included. Network meta-analysis found that multimedia (relative risk [RR] 1.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02-2.24), print (RR 1.82, 95% CI 1.23-2.69), and website-based (RR 1.99, 95% CI 1.32-3.01) DAs significantly increased participation in SDM compared to the computer-based DA. There was a significant reduction in the actual screening utilisation in the computer DA arm compared to the other delivery modes. No significant differences between all delivery modes were noted on knowledge levels, knowledge scores, decisional conflict, preference for SDM participation, and intention to undergo screening. The highest mean surface under the cumulative ranking curve for all primary outcomes showed that website-based was the most effective delivery mode, followed by print-based DA. The pairwise meta-analysis showed a significant increase in participants' knowledge level, knowledge scores, a reduced intention to undergo screening and actual screening utilisation compared to UC.The findings suggest that different types of DAs have varying levels of effectiveness in increasing knowledge level, knowledge scores, participation in SDM, and influencing screening behaviours. While website-based DA appeared the most effective, employing the print-based DA could be a practical solution in settings with limited resources.CONCLUSIONSThe findings suggest that different types of DAs have varying levels of effectiveness in increasing knowledge level, knowledge scores, participation in SDM, and influencing screening behaviours. While website-based DA appeared the most effective, employing the print-based DA could be a practical solution in settings with limited resources. Objective To review and compare the efficacy of different delivery modes of decision aids (DAs), including computer‐based, print‐based, multimedia‐based, video‐based, and website‐based on decision‐making outcomes for prostate cancer screening compared to usual care (UC) and among the delivery modes. Methods PubMed, the Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Google Advanced Search, and Turning Research Into Practice (TRIP) Database were systematically searched from inception to August 2023. The primary outcomes were knowledge level, knowledge scores, participation in shared decision‐making (SDM), decisional conflict, and preference for SDM participation. Secondary outcomes were the proportion of subjects who underwent screening (actual screening utilisation) and the proportion of subjects who intended to be screened (intention to undergo screening). Network and pairwise meta‐analyses were performed using random‐effects models. Results Seven systematic reviews were included. Network meta‐analysis found that multimedia (relative risk [RR] 1.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02–2.24), print (RR 1.82, 95% CI 1.23–2.69), and website‐based (RR 1.99, 95% CI 1.32–3.01) DAs significantly increased participation in SDM compared to the computer‐based DA. There was a significant reduction in the actual screening utilisation in the computer DA arm compared to the other delivery modes. No significant differences between all delivery modes were noted on knowledge levels, knowledge scores, decisional conflict, preference for SDM participation, and intention to undergo screening. The highest mean surface under the cumulative ranking curve for all primary outcomes showed that website‐based was the most effective delivery mode, followed by print‐based DA. The pairwise meta‐analysis showed a significant increase in participants’ knowledge level, knowledge scores, a reduced intention to undergo screening and actual screening utilisation compared to UC. Conclusions The findings suggest that different types of DAs have varying levels of effectiveness in increasing knowledge level, knowledge scores, participation in SDM, and influencing screening behaviours. While website‐based DA appeared the most effective, employing the print‐based DA could be a practical solution in settings with limited resources. ObjectiveTo review and compare the efficacy of different delivery modes of decision aids (DAs), including computer‐based, print‐based, multimedia‐based, video‐based, and website‐based on decision‐making outcomes for prostate cancer screening compared to usual care (UC) and among the delivery modes.MethodsPubMed, the Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Google Advanced Search, and Turning Research Into Practice (TRIP) Database were systematically searched from inception to August 2023. The primary outcomes were knowledge level, knowledge scores, participation in shared decision‐making (SDM), decisional conflict, and preference for SDM participation. Secondary outcomes were the proportion of subjects who underwent screening (actual screening utilisation) and the proportion of subjects who intended to be screened (intention to undergo screening). Network and pairwise meta‐analyses were performed using random‐effects models.ResultsSeven systematic reviews were included. Network meta‐analysis found that multimedia (relative risk [RR] 1.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02–2.24), print (RR 1.82, 95% CI 1.23–2.69), and website‐based (RR 1.99, 95% CI 1.32–3.01) DAs significantly increased participation in SDM compared to the computer‐based DA. There was a significant reduction in the actual screening utilisation in the computer DA arm compared to the other delivery modes. No significant differences between all delivery modes were noted on knowledge levels, knowledge scores, decisional conflict, preference for SDM participation, and intention to undergo screening. The highest mean surface under the cumulative ranking curve for all primary outcomes showed that website‐based was the most effective delivery mode, followed by print‐based DA. The pairwise meta‐analysis showed a significant increase in participants’ knowledge level, knowledge scores, a reduced intention to undergo screening and actual screening utilisation compared to UC.ConclusionsThe findings suggest that different types of DAs have varying levels of effectiveness in increasing knowledge level, knowledge scores, participation in SDM, and influencing screening behaviours. While website‐based DA appeared the most effective, employing the print‐based DA could be a practical solution in settings with limited resources. |
Author | Ang, Zen Yang Md Nesran, Zarith Nameyrra Kong, Yuke‐Lin Lee, Shaun Wen Huey |
AuthorAffiliation | 1 Institute for Health Systems Research, National Institutes of Health Ministry of Health Malaysia Shah Alam Selangor Malaysia 2 School of Pharmacy Monash University Malaysia Subang Jaya Selangor Malaysia |
AuthorAffiliation_xml | – name: 2 School of Pharmacy Monash University Malaysia Subang Jaya Selangor Malaysia – name: 1 Institute for Health Systems Research, National Institutes of Health Ministry of Health Malaysia Shah Alam Selangor Malaysia |
Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Zen Yang orcidid: 0000-0001-9716-3591 surname: Ang fullname: Ang, Zen Yang email: angzenyang@moh.gov.my, angzenyang@gmail.com organization: Monash University Malaysia – sequence: 2 givenname: Yuke‐Lin surname: Kong fullname: Kong, Yuke‐Lin organization: Ministry of Health Malaysia – sequence: 3 givenname: Zarith Nameyrra surname: Md Nesran fullname: Md Nesran, Zarith Nameyrra organization: Ministry of Health Malaysia – sequence: 4 givenname: Shaun Wen Huey orcidid: 0000-0001-7361-6576 surname: Lee fullname: Lee, Shaun Wen Huey organization: Monash University Malaysia |
BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39402746$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
BookMark | eNp1kctuEzEUhi1URC-w4AWQJTZ0kdbO-DLDBkFVbqrEhkrsLI99XBxm7NSeSTS7PgLPyJPgkARBBd749v2_zjn_MToIMQBCTyk5o2Wdt4vxjArO-AN0RJlgM0bJl4P9mTTiEB3nvCCkPAj-CB1WDSNzycQRur10zhttJhwdtmB89jFg7W25dH4FacJ9tJCxD3iZYh70ANjoYCDhbBJA8OHmJR77NkHXaZxg5WGNdbA4wLCO6RvuYdA_7r7roLsp-_wYPXS6y_Bkt5-g67eXny_ez64-vftw8fpqZhhjfMa4q7lx1OnGEmedrZgz1sm2bqltpZwzMTet07IhwCSZC0Ks43UjuGM1Z3V1gl5tfZdj24M1EIakO7VMvtdpUlF79fdP8F_VTVwpSiXjTS2Lw4udQ4q3I-RB9T6bTZsB4phVRakQUkheFfT5PXQRx1Q63lBczjmXlSjUsz9L-l3LPo4CnG8BU0adEzhlfJl4iaRU6DtFidoErkrg6lfgRXF6T7E3_Re7c1_7Dqb_g-rNx-ut4ifMH71R |
CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_1111_bju_16580 |
Cites_doi | 10.1136/bmj.j4008 10.1007/s11606-012-2086-5 10.1016/S0738-3991(98)00123-2 10.1177/2150131912447074 10.1007/s11739-016-1583-7 10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.0763 10.1371/journal.pone.0076654 10.2196/jmir.9070 10.1038/s41598-021-02696-z 10.1164/rccm.201404-0728CP 10.1002/9781119536604 10.1001/jamaoncol.2021.6987 10.1177/0272989X13501721 10.1007/s11606-015-3214-9 10.3322/caac.21660 10.1037/0278-6133.27.6.711 10.1370/afm.623 10.1177/0898264320966266 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.30047.x 10.1136/bmj.e256 10.1111/iju.14039 10.1016/j.amepre.2018.06.016 10.1002/pon.3815 10.1016/j.cct.2014.10.007 10.1186/s12889-021-11623-w 10.7326/M14-2385 10.1186/s13643-015-0125-0 10.4178/epih.e2017047 10.1186/s12885-018-4794-7 10.1007/s11606-014-2994-7 |
ContentType | Journal Article |
Copyright | 2024 The Author(s). published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of BJU International. 2024 The Author(s). BJU International published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of BJU International. 2024. This article is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License. |
Copyright_xml | – notice: 2024 The Author(s). published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of BJU International. – notice: 2024 The Author(s). BJU International published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of BJU International. – notice: 2024. This article is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License. |
DBID | 24P AAYXX CITATION CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 7QP 7X8 5PM |
DOI | 10.1111/bju.16545 |
DatabaseName | Wiley Online Library Open Access CrossRef Medline MEDLINE MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE MEDLINE PubMed Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts MEDLINE - Academic PubMed Central (Full Participant titles) |
DatabaseTitle | CrossRef MEDLINE Medline Complete MEDLINE with Full Text PubMed MEDLINE (Ovid) Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts MEDLINE - Academic |
DatabaseTitleList | MEDLINE MEDLINE - Academic Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts |
Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: 24P name: Wiley Online Library Open Access url: https://authorservices.wiley.com/open-science/open-access/browse-journals.html sourceTypes: Publisher – sequence: 2 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 3 dbid: EIF name: MEDLINE url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=https://www.webofscience.com/wos/medline/basic-search sourceTypes: Index Database |
DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
Discipline | Medicine |
DocumentTitleAlternate | Decision aid delivery modes in PCa screening |
EISSN | 1464-410X |
EndPage | 234 |
ExternalDocumentID | PMC11745987 39402746 10_1111_bju_16545 BJU16545 |
Genre | reviewArticle Systematic Review Journal Article Network Meta-Analysis |
GroupedDBID | --- .3N .55 .GA .Y3 05W 0R~ 10A 1OC 23N 24P 2WC 31~ 33P 36B 3O- 3SF 4.4 50Y 50Z 51W 51X 52M 52N 52O 52P 52R 52S 52T 52U 52V 52W 52X 53G 5GY 5HH 5LA 5RE 5VS 66C 6P2 702 7PT 8-0 8-1 8-3 8-4 8-5 8UM 930 A01 A03 AAESR AAEVG AAHHS AAHQN AAIPD AAMNL AANLZ AAONW AASGY AAXRX AAYCA AAZKR ABCQN ABCUV ABDBF ABEML ABJNI ABLJU ABOCM ABPVW ABQWH ABXGK ACAHQ ACCFJ ACCZN ACFBH ACGFS ACGOF ACMXC ACPOU ACPRK ACSCC ACUHS ACXBN ACXQS ADBBV ADBTR ADEOM ADIZJ ADKYN ADMGS ADOZA ADXAS ADZMN ADZOD AEEZP AEIGN AEIMD AENEX AEQDE AEUQT AEUYR AFBPY AFEBI AFFNX AFFPM AFGKR AFPWT AFWVQ AFZJQ AHBTC AHMBA AIACR AITYG AIURR AIWBW AJBDE ALAGY ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS ALUQN ALVPJ AMBMR AMYDB ATUGU AZBYB AZVAB BAFTC BAWUL BFHJK BHBCM BMXJE BROTX BRXPI BY8 C45 CAG COF CS3 D-6 D-7 D-E D-F DCZOG DIK DPXWK DR2 DRFUL DRMAN DRSTM DU5 E3Z EAD EAP EBC EBD EBS EJD EMB EMK EMOBN ESX EX3 F00 F01 F04 F5P FUBAC G-S G.N GODZA H.X HF~ HGLYW HZI HZ~ IHE IX1 J0M J5H K48 KBYEO LATKE LC2 LC3 LEEKS LH4 LITHE LOXES LP6 LP7 LUTES LW6 LYRES MEWTI MK4 MRFUL MRMAN MRSTM MSFUL MSMAN MSSTM MXFUL MXMAN MXSTM N04 N05 N9A NF~ O66 O9- OIG OK1 OVD P2P P2W P2X P2Z P4B P4D PQQKQ Q.N Q11 QB0 R.K RJQFR ROL RX1 SUPJJ SV3 TEORI TUS UB1 V9Y W8V W99 WBKPD WHWMO WIH WIJ WIK WOHZO WOW WQJ WRC WVDHM WXI WXSBR X7M XG1 YFH ZGI ZXP ~IA ~WT AAYXX AEYWJ AGHNM AGYGG CITATION AAMMB AEFGJ AGXDD AIDQK AIDYY CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 1OB 7QP 7X8 5PM |
ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c4445-45f85cf1fa9d0fdfd34fcdf7b8b1db772462cbfa790e4702600df58965f485483 |
IEDL.DBID | 24P |
ISSN | 1464-4096 1464-410X |
IngestDate | Thu Aug 21 18:41:15 EDT 2025 Fri Jul 11 10:18:34 EDT 2025 Wed Aug 13 10:52:47 EDT 2025 Sun Jul 13 01:33:45 EDT 2025 Tue Jul 01 02:00:03 EDT 2025 Thu Apr 24 23:13:01 EDT 2025 Tue Jan 21 09:50:44 EST 2025 |
IsDoiOpenAccess | true |
IsOpenAccess | true |
IsPeerReviewed | true |
IsScholarly | true |
Issue | 2 |
Keywords | prostate cancer screening decision support techniques prostate‐specific antigen decision aid |
Language | English |
License | Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2024 The Author(s). BJU International published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of BJU International. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
LinkModel | DirectLink |
MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c4445-45f85cf1fa9d0fdfd34fcdf7b8b1db772462cbfa790e4702600df58965f485483 |
Notes | ObjectType-Article-2 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 content type line 14 ObjectType-Feature-3 ObjectType-Evidence Based Healthcare-1 ObjectType-Article-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 ObjectType-Review-3 content type line 23 |
ORCID | 0000-0001-7361-6576 0000-0001-9716-3591 |
OpenAccessLink | https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111%2Fbju.16545 |
PMID | 39402746 |
PQID | 3157255736 |
PQPubID | 1026371 |
PageCount | 13 |
ParticipantIDs | pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_11745987 proquest_miscellaneous_3116676753 proquest_journals_3157255736 pubmed_primary_39402746 crossref_citationtrail_10_1111_bju_16545 crossref_primary_10_1111_bju_16545 wiley_primary_10_1111_bju_16545_BJU16545 |
ProviderPackageCode | CITATION AAYXX |
PublicationCentury | 2000 |
PublicationDate | February 2025 |
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2025-02-01 |
PublicationDate_xml | – month: 02 year: 2025 text: February 2025 |
PublicationDecade | 2020 |
PublicationPlace | England |
PublicationPlace_xml | – name: England – name: Edgecliff – name: Hoboken |
PublicationTitle | BJU international |
PublicationTitleAlternate | BJU Int |
PublicationYear | 2025 |
Publisher | Wiley Subscription Services, Inc John Wiley and Sons Inc |
Publisher_xml | – name: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc – name: John Wiley and Sons Inc |
References | 2015; 162 2021; 21 2013; 4 2015; 4 2012; 344 2008; 18 2015; 30 2017; 24 2014; 190 2024 2021; 71 2013; 8 2018; 20 2017; 358 2015; 24 2018; 18 2021; 11 2021; 33 2023 2001 2004; 19 2017; 39 2022; 8 2019; 26 1999; 37 2008; 27 2017; 12 2019 2018 2019; 179 2005; 97 2007; 5 2014 2012; 27 2013 2014; 39 2018; 55 2014; 34 e_1_2_12_4_1 e_1_2_12_3_1 e_1_2_12_18_1 e_1_2_12_2_1 e_1_2_12_17_1 e_1_2_12_16_1 Mottet N (e_1_2_12_7_1) 2023 e_1_2_12_42_1 e_1_2_12_20_1 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (e_1_2_12_39_1) 2014 e_1_2_12_41_1 e_1_2_12_21_1 e_1_2_12_22_1 Cornford P (e_1_2_12_6_1) 2024 e_1_2_12_23_1 Myers RE (e_1_2_12_26_1) 2005; 97 e_1_2_12_24_1 e_1_2_12_25_1 e_1_2_12_40_1 United States Preventive Services Task Force (e_1_2_12_5_1) 2018 e_1_2_12_27_1 e_1_2_12_28_1 e_1_2_12_29_1 e_1_2_12_30_1 e_1_2_12_32_1 e_1_2_12_33_1 Institute of Medicine Committee on Quality of Health Care in A (e_1_2_12_38_1) 2001 e_1_2_12_34_1 The Cochrane Collaboration (e_1_2_12_19_1) 2023 e_1_2_12_36_1 e_1_2_12_37_1 e_1_2_12_15_1 e_1_2_12_13_1 Husaini BA (e_1_2_12_31_1) 2008; 18 e_1_2_12_12_1 e_1_2_12_8_1 e_1_2_12_11_1 e_1_2_12_10_1 Stamm AW (e_1_2_12_35_1) 2017; 24 e_1_2_12_9_1 Lillie SE (e_1_2_12_14_1) 2014 |
References_xml | – volume: 8 start-page: 420 year: 2022 end-page: 444 article-title: Cancer incidence, mortality, years of life lost, years lived with disability, and disability‐adjusted life years for 29 cancer groups from 2010 to 2019: a systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2019 publication-title: JAMA Oncologia – volume: 4 start-page: 67 year: 2013 end-page: 74 article-title: Shared decision making in prostate‐specific antigen testing: the effect of a mailed patient flyer prior to an annual exam publication-title: J Prim Care Community Health – volume: 24 start-page: 1303 year: 2015 end-page: 1315 article-title: Assessing the effectiveness of decision aids for decision making in prostate cancer testing: a systematic review publication-title: Psychooncology – volume: 18 start-page: S2‐179‐84 issue: Suppl 2 year: 2008 article-title: A church‐based program on prostate cancer screening for African American men: reducing health disparities publication-title: Ethn Dis – volume: 71 start-page: 209 year: 2021 end-page: 249 article-title: Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries publication-title: CA Cancer J Clin – volume: 344 year: 2012 article-title: Shared decision making: really putting patients at the centre of healthcare publication-title: BMJ (Clinical research ed) – volume: 34 start-page: 699 year: 2014 end-page: 710 article-title: Toward minimum standards for certifying patient decision Aids: a modified Delphi consensus process publication-title: Med Decis Mak – volume: 27 start-page: 711 year: 2008 end-page: 721 article-title: Influence of a patient decision aid on decisional conflict related to PSA testing: a structural equation model publication-title: Health Psychol – volume: 39 year: 2017 article-title: Network meta‐analysis: application and practice using Stata publication-title: Epidemiol Health – volume: 55 start-page: 896 year: 2018 end-page: 907 article-title: Prostate cancer screening patient decision Aids: a systematic review and meta‐analysis publication-title: Am J Prev Med – year: 2001 – volume: 20 year: 2018 article-title: Web‐based versus usual care and other formats of decision Aids to support prostate cancer screening decisions: systematic review and meta‐analysis publication-title: J Med Internet Res – volume: 8 year: 2013 article-title: Graphical tools for network meta‐analysis in STATA publication-title: PLoS One – volume: 4 start-page: 138 year: 2015 article-title: Applying systematic review search methods to the grey literature: a case study examining guidelines for school‐based breakfast programs in Canada publication-title: Syst Rev – volume: 26 start-page: 956 year: 2019 end-page: 970 article-title: Screening for prostate cancer: history, evidence, controversies and future perspectives toward individualized screening publication-title: Int J Urol – year: 2024 – volume: 12 start-page: 103 year: 2017 end-page: 111 article-title: Network meta‐analysis: an introduction for clinicians publication-title: Intern Emerg Med – volume: 11 year: 2021 article-title: Decision aid and cost compensation influence uptake of PSA‐based early detection without affecting decisional conflict: a cluster randomised trial publication-title: Sci Rep – volume: 358 year: 2017 article-title: AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non‐randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both publication-title: BMJ (Clinical research ed) – volume: 5 start-page: 112 year: 2007 end-page: 119 article-title: Patient education on prostate cancer screening and involvement in decision making publication-title: Ann Fam Med – volume: 18 start-page: 1015 year: 2018 article-title: The effects of shared decision‐making compared to usual care for prostate cancer screening decisions: a systematic review and meta‐analysis publication-title: BMC Cancer – year: 2018 – year: 2014 – volume: 30 start-page: 33 year: 2015 end-page: 42 article-title: A comparison of web‐based versus print‐based decision AIDS for prostate cancer screening: participants' evaluation and utilization publication-title: J Gen Intern Med – volume: 24 start-page: 8910 year: 2017 end-page: 8917 article-title: A decision aid versus shared decision making for prostate cancer screening: results of a randomized, controlled trial publication-title: Can J Urol – volume: 33 start-page: 147 year: 2021 end-page: 154 article-title: Age differences in the use of health information technology among adults in the United States: an analysis of the health information National Trends Survey publication-title: J Aging Health – volume: 190 start-page: 366 year: 2014 end-page: 373 article-title: A universal decision support system. Addressing the decision‐making needs of patients, families, and clinicians in the setting of critical illness publication-title: Am J Respir Crit Care Med – volume: 97 start-page: 1143 year: 2005 end-page: 1154 article-title: Preparing African‐American men in community primary care practices to decide whether or not to have prostate cancer screening publication-title: J Natl Med Assoc – volume: 19 start-page: 835 year: 2004 end-page: 842 article-title: Randomized trial examining the effect of two prostate cancer screening educational interventions on patient knowledge, preferences, and behaviors publication-title: J Gen Intern Med – volume: 39 start-page: 327 year: 2014 end-page: 334 article-title: Informed decision making among first‐degree relatives of prostate cancer survivors: a pilot randomized trial publication-title: Contemp Clin Trials – year: 2023 – volume: 162 start-page: 777 year: 2015 end-page: 784 article-title: The PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta‐analyses of health care interventions: checklist and explanations publication-title: Ann Intern Med – volume: 179 start-page: 1072 year: 2019 end-page: 1082 article-title: Decision Aids for prostate cancer screening choice: a systematic review and meta‐analysis publication-title: JAMA Intern Med – volume: 37 start-page: 255 year: 1999 end-page: 263 article-title: Information and patient participation in screening for prostate cancer publication-title: Patient Educ Couns – volume: 21 start-page: 1556 year: 2021 article-title: Barriers and facilitators to the use of e‐health by older adults: a scoping review publication-title: BMC Public Health – volume: 27 start-page: 1068 year: 2012 end-page: 1078 article-title: Interventions to improve decision making and reduce racial and ethnic disparities in the management of prostate cancer: a systematic review publication-title: J Gen Intern Med – year: 2019 – volume: 30 start-page: 810 year: 2015 end-page: 816 article-title: A randomized controlled effectiveness trial for PSA screening decision support interventions in two primary care settings publication-title: J Gen Intern Med – year: 2013 – volume-title: The Effects of Shared Decision Making on Cancer Screening – A Systematic Review year: 2014 ident: e_1_2_12_14_1 – ident: e_1_2_12_18_1 doi: 10.1136/bmj.j4008 – ident: e_1_2_12_25_1 doi: 10.1007/s11606-012-2086-5 – ident: e_1_2_12_36_1 doi: 10.1016/S0738-3991(98)00123-2 – ident: e_1_2_12_33_1 doi: 10.1177/2150131912447074 – volume-title: EAU‐EANM‐ESTRO‐ESUR‐ISUP‐SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer year: 2023 ident: e_1_2_12_7_1 – ident: e_1_2_12_23_1 doi: 10.1007/s11739-016-1583-7 – ident: e_1_2_12_13_1 doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.0763 – ident: e_1_2_12_22_1 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0076654 – volume-title: EAU‐EANM‐ESTRO‐ESUR‐ISUP‐SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer‐2024 Update. Part I: Screening, Diagnosis, and Local Treatment with Curative Intent year: 2024 ident: e_1_2_12_6_1 – volume: 97 start-page: 1143 year: 2005 ident: e_1_2_12_26_1 article-title: Preparing African‐American men in community primary care practices to decide whether or not to have prostate cancer screening publication-title: J Natl Med Assoc – volume: 18 start-page: S2‐179‐84 issue: 2 year: 2008 ident: e_1_2_12_31_1 article-title: A church‐based program on prostate cancer screening for African American men: reducing health disparities publication-title: Ethn Dis – ident: e_1_2_12_10_1 doi: 10.2196/jmir.9070 – volume-title: Final Recommendation Statement – Prostate Cancer: Screening year: 2018 ident: e_1_2_12_5_1 – ident: e_1_2_12_28_1 doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-02696-z – ident: e_1_2_12_42_1 doi: 10.1164/rccm.201404-0728CP – ident: e_1_2_12_20_1 doi: 10.1002/9781119536604 – ident: e_1_2_12_3_1 doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2021.6987 – ident: e_1_2_12_8_1 – ident: e_1_2_12_17_1 doi: 10.1177/0272989X13501721 – ident: e_1_2_12_29_1 doi: 10.1007/s11606-015-3214-9 – ident: e_1_2_12_2_1 doi: 10.3322/caac.21660 – ident: e_1_2_12_37_1 doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.27.6.711 – volume-title: The SHARE Approach—Essential Steps of Shared Decisionmaking: Quick Reference Guide year: 2014 ident: e_1_2_12_39_1 – ident: e_1_2_12_32_1 doi: 10.1370/afm.623 – ident: e_1_2_12_40_1 doi: 10.1177/0898264320966266 – ident: e_1_2_12_34_1 doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.30047.x – ident: e_1_2_12_9_1 doi: 10.1136/bmj.e256 – volume-title: Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) Tool year: 2023 ident: e_1_2_12_19_1 – ident: e_1_2_12_4_1 doi: 10.1111/iju.14039 – ident: e_1_2_12_11_1 doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2018.06.016 – ident: e_1_2_12_24_1 doi: 10.1002/pon.3815 – ident: e_1_2_12_27_1 doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2014.10.007 – ident: e_1_2_12_41_1 doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-11623-w – volume: 24 start-page: 8910 year: 2017 ident: e_1_2_12_35_1 article-title: A decision aid versus shared decision making for prostate cancer screening: results of a randomized, controlled trial publication-title: Can J Urol – ident: e_1_2_12_15_1 doi: 10.7326/M14-2385 – ident: e_1_2_12_16_1 doi: 10.1186/s13643-015-0125-0 – ident: e_1_2_12_21_1 doi: 10.4178/epih.e2017047 – ident: e_1_2_12_12_1 doi: 10.1186/s12885-018-4794-7 – ident: e_1_2_12_30_1 doi: 10.1007/s11606-014-2994-7 – volume-title: Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century year: 2001 ident: e_1_2_12_38_1 |
SSID | ssj0014665 |
Score | 2.455505 |
SecondaryResourceType | review_article |
Snippet | Objective
To review and compare the efficacy of different delivery modes of decision aids (DAs), including computer‐based, print‐based, multimedia‐based,... To review and compare the efficacy of different delivery modes of decision aids (DAs), including computer-based, print-based, multimedia-based, video-based,... ObjectiveTo review and compare the efficacy of different delivery modes of decision aids (DAs), including computer‐based, print‐based, multimedia‐based,... |
SourceID | pubmedcentral proquest pubmed crossref wiley |
SourceType | Open Access Repository Aggregation Database Index Database Enrichment Source Publisher |
StartPage | 222 |
SubjectTerms | Cancer screening decision aid Decision making Decision Support Techniques Early Detection of Cancer - methods Humans Knowledge Male Medical screening Meta-analysis Multimedia Prostate cancer prostate‐specific antigen Prostatic Neoplasms - diagnosis Review Reviews screening |
Title | Efficacy of decision aid delivery modes in prostate cancer screening: umbrella review and network meta‐analysis |
URI | https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111%2Fbju.16545 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39402746 https://www.proquest.com/docview/3157255736 https://www.proquest.com/docview/3116676753 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC11745987 |
Volume | 135 |
hasFullText | 1 |
inHoldings | 1 |
isFullTextHit | |
isPrint | |
link | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwjV1La9xADBZpAqWX0qavbdMyKT304uKHZsZOTn0khEBCKV3IzYznQbck3jS7e8gtPyG_sb-k0thrsqSBXPxgZPyQNJI80ieAD5ashkQrE5r9dYI-ZInJtU-yoE3qCp-nyIXCR8fqYIyHJ_JkDXaXtTAdPsTww401I87XrOCmmd1Q8ub34hOX4sgHsMGltSzkOX4flhBQxT6StEcKkirVwwpxGs9w6aoxuuVh3k6UvOnARgu0_wQe966j-Nzx-ims-XYTHh71i-PP4M8ew0EYeymmQbi-d44wE0cnp5x-cSm4781MTFpxzsUe5GYKy1y_EDR5UEBLZmxHLM4oSibhEF1VizCtE22XLC7O_Nz8vbo2PZLJcxjv7_38epD0HRUSi4jEEBlKaUMWTOXS4IIrMFgXdFM2mWvI0UaV2yYYXaUeNcONpS7IslIyYEmxTfEC1ttp61-B0KZCT1S51xmaUjVaVbbQROp1iUGO4OPy09a2hxvnrhen9TLsIC7UkQsjeD-QnncYG_8j2lryp-7VbFYXmdQUE-lCjWB7GCYF4VUP0_rpgmkyFVHpihG87Ng53IXbwlNYTleXK4weCBh8e3WknfyKINwZhXKyKjW9Z5SJu5-8_nI4jgev70_6Bh7l3Gg4podvwfr8YuHfkvczb95FKafttx_5P6t1A74 |
linkProvider | Wiley-Blackwell |
linkToHtml | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwjV1Lb9QwEB6VIkEviDcLBQziwCUoj7GdIC6AWi2lW3HoSr1Fjh9iUZvtY_fQGz-B38gvYcbJRl0VJE5J5LGSeDyeGXvmG4A3lrSGRCsTWv11gj5kicm1T7KgTeoKn6fIicKTAzWe4t6RPNqAD6tcmA4fYthwY8mI6zULOG9IX5Hy5sfyHefiyBtwE1WuuXBDjt-GMwRUsZAkXZG8pEr1uEIcxzN0XddG10zM65GSVy3YqIJ278Kd3nYUHztm34MN396HW5P-dPwBnO0wHoSxl2IehOuL5wgzc_RwzPEXl4IL31yIWStOOduD7Exhme3nglYP8mhJj70XyxNyk2l2iC6tRZjWibaLFhcnfmF-__xleiiThzDd3Tn8PE76kgqJRUTiiAyltCELpnJpcMEVGKwLuimbzDVkadNA2iYYXaUeNeONpS7IslIyYEnOTfEINtt565-A0KZCT1S51xmaUjVaVbbQROp1iUGO4O1qaGvb441z2YvjeuV3EBfqyIURvB5ITzuQjb8Rba_4U_dydlEXmdTkFOlCjeDV0EwSwscepvXzJdNkKsLSFSN43LFzeAvXhSe_nHqXa4weCBh9e72lnX2PKNwZ-XKyKjX9Z5wT__7y-tPeNN48_X_Sl3B7fDjZr_e_HHx9Bls5Vx2OseLbsLk4X_rnZAotmhdxxv8BiPMGQQ |
linkToPdf | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwjV1Lb9RADLZKkSouiDdbCgyIA5egPDwzCZx4dFUKrXpgpd6iyTzEoja7bXcPvfET-I38EuxJNuqqIHFKovEoD9szdmx_BnhladeQaGVCq79O0IcsMbn2SRa0SV3h8xS5UPjgUO1NcP9YHm_Au1UtTIcPMfxwY82I6zUr-NyFK0re_Fi-4VIceQNucrCPxTvHoyGEgCr2kaQjkpNUqR5WiNN4hqnrm9E1C_N6ouRVAzbuQOM7cLs3HcX7jtd3YcO392DroA-O34ezXYaDMPZSzIJwfe8cYaaOLk44_eJScN-bCzFtxZyLPcjMFJa5fi5o8SCHlraxt2J5Sl4yCYfoqlqEaZ1ou2RxceoX5vfPX6ZHMnkAk_Hut497Sd9RIbGISAyRoZQ2ZMFULg0uuAKDdUE3ZZO5hgxtVLltgtFV6lEz3FjqgiwrJQOW5NsUD2GznbX-MQhtKvRElXudoSlVo1VlC02kXpcY5Aherz5tbXu4ce56cVKv3A7iQh25MIKXA-m8w9j4G9HOij91r2YXdZFJTT6RLtQIXgzDpCAc9TCtny2ZJlMRla4YwaOOncNduC08ueU0u1xj9EDA4NvrI-30ewThzsiVk1Wp6T2jTPz7yesP-5N4sv3_pM9h6-jTuP76-fDLE7iVc8_hmCm-A5uL86V_SobQonkWBf4PAbQFcw |
openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Efficacy+of+decision+aid+delivery+modes+in+prostate+cancer+screening%3A+umbrella+review+and+network+meta-analysis&rft.jtitle=BJU+international&rft.au=Ang%2C+Zen+Yang&rft.au=Kong%2C+Yuke-Lin&rft.au=Md+Nesran%2C+Zarith+Nameyrra&rft.au=Lee%2C+Shaun+Wen+Huey&rft.date=2025-02-01&rft.issn=1464-410X&rft.eissn=1464-410X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111%2Fbju.16545&rft.externalDBID=NO_FULL_TEXT |
thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=1464-4096&client=summon |
thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=1464-4096&client=summon |
thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=1464-4096&client=summon |