ArticleBJUI compass2024
Targeted Prostate Health Checks, a novel system to identify men with prostate cancer-A pilot study.
Article in BJUI compass, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Erratum.BJUI compass · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedErratum.2024
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The objective of this study is to report the pilot phase of the Targeted Prostate Health Check programme that aims to identify men in the Surrey and Sussex region who have prostate cancer and who failed to be detected during the Covid era. Subjects and methods: Men aged 50 to 70, or 45 to 70 if Black or with a family history of prostate cancer, were identified from participating general practitioner (GP) records. Short message service (SMS) texts invited men to visit www.talkprostate.co.uk for information on prostate cancer and give consent to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) checks coordinated by a third-party virtual healthcare provider. Elevated age-related PSA levels, or levels below age-related thresholds but at 3 ng/mL or more, triggered referral to a rapid access urology clinic. GPs were informed of the results. Results: From 1842 text messages inviting 1549 people, 544 men consented to a PSA check. From 500 phlebotomy appointments, 485 (30% of invited men) took the PSA test of whom 68 (14%) were referred with an elevated PSA. After clinical review with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI), 22 patients underwent transperineal biopsies, and prostate cancer was detected in 18 men of whom 17 (95%) had clinically significant cancer. Conclusion: Our Targeted Prostate Cancer Health Check system identifies men at risk without burdening primary care. Awareness on prostate cancer risk was raised in 1549 invited men, half of whom were further educated via the registration website. One third of invited men were checked in whom clinically significant prostate cancer was found in 3.5%.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.