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....

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inBJU international Vol. 135; no. 2; pp. 222 - 234
Main Authors Ang, Zen Yang, Kong, Yuke‐Lin, Md Nesran, Zarith Nameyrra, Lee, Shaun Wen Huey
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published England Wiley Subscription Services, Inc 01.02.2025
John Wiley and Sons Inc
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN1464-4096
1464-410X
1464-410X
DOI10.1111/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