Stephanie L McFall1, Patricia D Mullen2, Theresa L Byrd3, Scott B Cantor4, Yen-Chi Le2, Isabel Torres-Vigil5, Curtis Pettaway6, Robert J Volk7. 1. Institute for Social and Economic Research University of Essex, Colchester, UK. 2. School of Public Health, The University of Texas Health Sciences Center, Houston, TX, USA. 3. Department of Family and Community Medicine, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, El Paso, TX, USA. 4. Department of Health Services Research, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. 5. Graduate College of Social Work, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA. 6. Department of Urology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. 7. Department of General Internal Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Few decision aids emphasize active surveillance (AS) for localized prostate cancer. Concept mapping was used to produce a conceptual framework incorporating AS and treatment. METHODS: Fifty-four statements about what men need to make a decision for localized prostate cancer were derived from focus groups with African American, Latino and white men previously screened for prostate cancer and partners (n = 80). In the second phase, 89 participants sorted and rated the importance of statements. RESULTS: An eight cluster map was produced for the overall sample. Clusters were labelled Doctor-patient exchange, Big picture comparisons, Weighing the options, Seeking and using information, Spirituality and inner strength, Related to active treatment, Side-effects and Family concerns. A major division was between medical and home-based clusters. Ethnic groups and genders had similar sorting, but some variation in importance. Latinos rated Big picture comparisons as less important. African Americans saw Spirituality and inner strength most important, followed by Latinos, then whites. Ethnic- and gender-specific concept maps were not analysed because of high similarity in their sorting patterns. CONCLUSIONS: We identified a conceptual framework for management of early-stage prostate cancer that included coverage of AS. Eliciting the conceptual framework is an important step in constructing decision aids which will address gaps related to AS.
OBJECTIVE: Few decision aids emphasize active surveillance (AS) for localized prostate cancer. Concept mapping was used to produce a conceptual framework incorporating AS and treatment. METHODS: Fifty-four statements about what men need to make a decision for localized prostate cancer were derived from focus groups with African American, Latino and white men previously screened for prostate cancer and partners (n = 80). In the second phase, 89 participants sorted and rated the importance of statements. RESULTS: An eight cluster map was produced for the overall sample. Clusters were labelled Doctor-patient exchange, Big picture comparisons, Weighing the options, Seeking and using information, Spirituality and inner strength, Related to active treatment, Side-effects and Family concerns. A major division was between medical and home-based clusters. Ethnic groups and genders had similar sorting, but some variation in importance. Latinos rated Big picture comparisons as less important. African Americans saw Spirituality and inner strength most important, followed by Latinos, then whites. Ethnic- and gender-specific concept maps were not analysed because of high similarity in their sorting patterns. CONCLUSIONS: We identified a conceptual framework for management of early-stage prostate cancer that included coverage of AS. Eliciting the conceptual framework is an important step in constructing decision aids which will address gaps related to AS.
Authors: Vickie L Shavers; Martin L Brown; Arnold L Potosky; Carrie N Klabunde; W W Davis; Judd W Moul; Angela Fahey Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Jessica G Burke; Patricia O'Campo; Geri L Peak; Andrea C Gielen; Karen A McDonnell; William M K Trochim Journal: Qual Health Res Date: 2005-12
Authors: Margaret Holmes-Rovner; Sue Stableford; Angela Fagerlin; John T Wei; Rodney L Dunn; Janet Ohene-Frempong; Karen Kelly-Blake; David R Rovner Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2005-06-20 Impact factor: 2.796
Authors: Steven B Zeliadt; Scott D Ramsey; David F Penson; Ingrid J Hall; Donatus U Ekwueme; Leonard Stroud; Judith W Lee Journal: Cancer Date: 2006-05-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Vickie L Shavers; Martin Brown; Carrie N Klabunde; Arnold L Potosky; William Davis; Judd Moul; Angela Fahey Journal: Med Care Date: 2004-03 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Robert J Volk; Scott B Cantor; Alvah R Cass; Stephen J Spann; Susan C Weller; Murray D Krahn Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2004-04 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Susan R Harlan; Matthew R Cooperberg; Eric P Elkin; Deborah P Lubeck; Maxwell V Meng; Shilpa S Mehta; Peter R Carroll Journal: J Urol Date: 2003-11 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Katie L Hackett; Julia L Newton; Katherine H O Deane; Tim Rapley; Vincent Deary; Niina Kolehmainen; Dennis Lendrem; Wan-Fai Ng Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2014-08-21 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Ayun Cassell; Bashir Yunusa; Mohamed Jalloh; Mouhamadou M Mbodji; Abdourahmane Diallo; Madina Ndoye; Saint Charles Kouka; Issa Labou; Lamine Niang; Serigne M Gueye Journal: World J Oncol Date: 2019-09-20
Authors: Penelope Schofield; Karla Gough; Amelia Hyatt; Alan White; Mark Frydenberg; Suzanne Chambers; Louisa G Gordon; Robert Gardiner; Declan G Murphy; Lawrence Cavedon; Natalie Richards; Barbara Murphy; Stephen Quinn; Ilona Juraskova Journal: Trials Date: 2021-01-11 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Nynikka R Palmer; Steven E Gregorich; Jennifer Livaudais-Toman; Jane Jih; Celia P Kaplan Journal: J Racial Ethn Health Disparities Date: 2018-03-07
Authors: Katie L Hackett; Rebecca L Lambson; Victoria Strassheim; Zoe Gotts; Vincent Deary; Julia L Newton Journal: Health Expect Date: 2015-09-01 Impact factor: 3.377