Literature DB >> 24738039

Uptake of prostate cancer screening and associated factors among Chinese men aged 50 or more: a population-based survey.

Winnie K W So1, Kai Chow Choi1, Winnie P Y Tang1, Paul C W Lee1, Ann T Y Shiu1, Simone S M Ho1, Helen Y L Chan1, Wendy W T Lam1, William B Goggins1, Carmen W H Chan1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the uptake rate of prostate specific antigen (PSA) testing among Hong Kong Chinese males aged 50 or above, and identify factors associated with the likelihood of undergoing a PSA test.
METHODS: A population-based telephone survey was conducted in Hong Kong in 2007. The survey covered demographic information, perceived health status, use of complementary therapy, cancer screening behavior, perceived susceptibility to cancer and family history of cancer. Descriptive statistics, percentages and logistic regression analysis were used for data analysis.
RESULTS: A total of 1,002 men aged 50 or above took part in the study (response rate =67%), and the uptake rate of PSA testing was found to be 10%. Employment status, use of complementary therapy, perceiving regular visits to a doctor as good for health and the recommendations of health professionals were significant factors associated with PSA testing.
CONCLUSION: The uptake rate of PSA testing in the study population was very low. Among all the factors identified, recommendations from health professionals had the strongest association with the uptake of PSA testing, and they should therefore take an active role in educating this population about cancer prevention and detection.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Prostatic neoplasms; early detection of cancer; population-based survey; prostate-specific antigen (PSA)

Year:  2014        PMID: 24738039      PMCID: PMC3969801          DOI: 10.7497/j.issn.2095-3941.2014.01.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Biol Med        ISSN: 2095-3941            Impact factor:   4.248


Introduction

Globally, prostate cancer has been reported to be the second most common cancer and the sixth leading cause of death among men. Compared with worldwide figures, the incidence of prostate cancer in China is low, estimated in 2008 to be more than 33,000 with the age-standardized incidence and mortality rate of 4.3 and 1.8 per 100,000, respectively. However, the trend is increasing, and it is estimated that by 2020 new cases will number over 49,000 and account for more than 20,000 deaths. Locally, the incidence of prostate cancer has also been increasing over the past two decades. In 2010, prostate cancer was the third most common cancer and the fifth leading cause of cancer death in males. The Hong Kong Cancer Registry reported in 2010 that there were 1,492 new cases, the age-standardized incidence rate was 28.1, and the age-standardized death rate was 5.5 per 100,000 of the standard population. Although the causes of prostate cancer are not yet fully understood, it is believed that advanced age (above 50), a positive family history of prostate cancer and an African-American ethnic background are risk factors,. Early detection is commonly effected by serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) screening, digital rectal examination (DRE) and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS). Among these three, PSA was found to be the most accurate single diagnostic tool, and more cost-effective than DRE or a combination of DRE and PSA,. The detection rate of DRE also depends on the level of PSA and the experience and technique of the physician. With low levels of PSA, the sensitivity of DRE was low, and its performance in detecting small-volume tumors was also poorer than PSA. However, the recommendation in early prostate cancer screening of serum PSA testing remains controversial. Arguments against such screening concern over-diagnosis, over-treatment and its consequent adverse effects,. One systematic review and meta-analysis found that the effect of screening on death and overall mortality from prostate cancer was insignificant. In contrast, a large randomized controlled trial conducted by the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) reported a 20% reduction in prostate cancer deaths, and another observational study also found a significant decrease in such mortality. PSA screening is also associated with an increased diagnosis of early stage prostate cancer and a decrease in advanced stage and distant metastases, and thus with higher survival rates,. Nevertheless, the American Cancer Society (ACS) recommends that men who are asymptomatic and have a life expectancy of at least ten years should discuss the matter with their physician and reach an informed decision about prostate cancer screening, with the pros and cons of such screening being fully explained. For men at risk, the optimal age for receiving such information depend on the level of risk—the higher the risk, the younger the age shared and informed decision-making should be initiated. As the population is generally aging and the general public is more concerned about health, the need for screening is clearly increasing. The uptake rates for prostate cancer screening among African Americans and Canadians were 36% and 47.5%, respectively,. In Chinese populations, the rate is low. In Taiwan, studies have reported the uptake rate to be between 12.4% and 29.4%,. Different studies have been conducted to investigate the factors associated with participation in prostate cancer screening. Qualitative studies have found fear of cancer, lack of knowledge, embarrassment and perceived low risk were barriers, while a family history of prostate cancer, urinary symptoms and physician’s recommendations were facilitators,. Age, educational attainment, household income, insurance coverage and marital status are common predictive factors,,. Other contributing factors include chronic illness, obesity, medical visits and perceptions of health,,. Several studies have also investigated the facilitators and barriers in Chinese populations, with similar findings: physician’s recommendations, history of benign prostate hypertrophy, embarrassment, lack of knowledge, being asymptomatic, and financial status all being noted,. However, no study has been conducted in Hong Kong to investigate the rate of prostate cancer screening and the associated factors affecting uptake. In addition, even though Hong Kong and Taiwan share the same cultural origins, diverse sub-cultures have developed with the differences in historical backgrounds and geographical positions. Furthermore, there are differences in the social, political and economic systems between the two places,, which may cause variations in social norms and health-seeking behavior in their respective populations. It is therefore worth investigating the factors affecting prostate cancer screening in Hong Kong. Thus, the study aimed to investigate the uptake rate of PSA testing among Hong Kong Chinese males aged over 50, and identify the factors associated with the probability of that population undergoing PSA testing.

Materials and methods

This study was conducted in 2007 using a population-based telephone survey. The methodology of the survey was described elsewhere. In brief, participants of the present study were Hong Kong Chinese residents aged 50 years or above. A structured questionnaire consisted of six sections: demographics, perceived health condition, use of complementary therapy, cancer screening behaviour, perceived susceptibility to cancer and family history of cancer. In the section on complementary therapy, respondents were given a four-point rating scale to indicate how frequently they used it, where 0, never; 1, once only; 2, occasionally; 3, on a regular basis; and the 2005 cancer module of the National Health Interview Survey was used, in modified form, to collect data in the cancer screening behavior section. Ethical approval was obtained from the Survey and Behavioral Research Ethics Committee of the Chinese University of Hong Kong. Verbal consent was obtained from all participants. Telephone numbers were randomly selected from the updated residential directories, which include over 95% of households in Hong Kong, and anonymous interviews were carried out by the telephone survey team of the university’s Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics. Data collection went on from 6:30 pm to 10:30 pm only, to minimize over-representation of the non-working population. If there were two or more eligible household members, the member with birthday nearest to the interview date was recruited. To minimize any bias from non-responses, at least three calls were made at different times on the other days before assigning a non-response status to a number. Data were entered and analyzed with SPSS 17.0 (SPSS Inc, Chicago, USA). Descriptive statistics was used to summarize and present the data. Frequencies (percentages) were used to present the results of categorical variables. Stepwise multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors independently associated with prostate cancer screening behavior, and the factors to be explored are listed in and . A binary outcome variable was used to study screening behavior: ‘Have you ever had a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test?’ (Yes/No). Univariate analyses were first performed on each of the studied factors to select candidate independent variables for the multivariable analysis. Those factors with a P value <0.25 in the univariate analyses were selected as candidate variables for stepwise multivariable logistic regression to delineate factors independently associated with the screening behavior outcome. The results of significant factors identified were presented with their odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). All statistical tests involved were two-tailed and statistical significant level was set at 0.05.
Table 1

Demographic characteristics and health status of the respondents (n=1,002)

Characteristicsn (%)
Age*, yrs
         50-59382 (38.1)
         60-69273 (27.2)
         70-79251 (25.0)
         80 or above96 (9.6)
Education level
         Primary or below400 (40.1)
         Secondary417 (41.8)
         Matriculation or above181 (18.1)
Employment status
         Not employed671 (67.2)
         Employed327 (32.8)
Monthly household income (HK$)
         <10,000324 (32.8)
         10,000-29,999226 (22.9)
         ≥30,000130 (13.2)
         Don’t know/decline to disclose308 (31.2)
Marital status
         Single/divorced/widowed188 (18.9)
         Married/cohabited806 (81.1)
Family history of cancer
         No/don’t know785 (78.3)
         Yes217 (21.7)
Health status
          Chronic illness
                   Any confirmed chronic illness439 (43.8)
          Serious disease
                   Ever had a serious disease or cancer86 (8.6)
          Smoking status
                   Never smoker568 (56.7)
                   Ex-smoker230 (23.0)
                   Current smoker204 (20.4)

Data are presented as frequency (%). *Age distribution of the whole men population aged 50 or above in Hong Kong in 2011: aged 50-59, 0.565 million (46.8%); aged 60-69, 0.326 million (27.0%); aged 70-79, 0.213 million (17.7%); aged 80 or above, 0.103 million (8.5%).

Table 2

Perceived health status and utilization of complementary therapies

Characteristicsn (%)
Health related perceptions
  Perceived health status
  Excellent/very good/good  489 (48.8)
  Fair/poor  513 (51.2)
  Perceived that following practices are good for health
         Doing exercise  754 (75.2)
         Maintaining a healthy diet  666 (66.5)
         Visiting a doctor regularly  422 (42.1)
         Visiting a Chinese herbalist regularly  183 (18.3)
         Taking dietary supplements  154 (15.4)
  Perceived susceptibility to cancer (ranged from 1= not at all likely to 10= extremely likely)
         5  676 (67.5)
         >5  80 (8.0)
         Unsure  246 (24.6)
Utilization of complementary therapy
  Ever used the following complementary therapies
         Acupuncture117 (11.7)
         Cupping97 (9.7)
         Chinese herbal medicine282 (28.1)
         Bone setting250 (25.0)
         Chinese massage141 (14.1)
Use of complementary therapy index
  0 (≤50th percentile)547 (54.6)
  1-2 (>50th-75th percentile)208 (20.8)
  3 (>75th percentile)247 (24.7)

Data are presented as frequency (%).

Data are presented as frequency (%). *Age distribution of the whole men population aged 50 or above in Hong Kong in 2011: aged 50-59, 0.565 million (46.8%); aged 60-69, 0.326 million (27.0%); aged 70-79, 0.213 million (17.7%); aged 80 or above, 0.103 million (8.5%). Data are presented as frequency (%).

Results

A total of 1,002 men aged 50 or above completed the anonymous survey and were included in the study (response rate =67%). The age distribution of the sample collected was reasonably comparable to that of the local population, although the 50-59 age group was somewhat under-represented (footnote to ).

Demographic characteristics and health status

The demographic characteristics and health status of the respondents are shown in . The mean age of the respondents was 64.2±10.2 years and ranged from 50 to 94 years. More than half had received a secondary education or above (60%). The majority were married or cohabiting (81%) and unemployed (67%), with 36% reporting a middle (HK$10,000-29,999, 1US$≈7.8HK$) or high (HK$30,000+) monthly household income, although a considerable proportion (31%) did not know or declined to disclose their income. Less than half had at least one type of chronic illness (44%), and only 9% had ever had cancer or other serious disease. One fifth of the men were current smokers, and 22% had a family history of cancer.

Perceived health status and use of complementary therapies

The respondents’ perceived health status and utilization of complementary therapies are shown in . Slightly over half reported their health status as fair or poor (51%), and the majority believed that doing exercise (75%) and maintaining a healthy diet (67%) were good for their health. Fewer than half perceived that visiting a doctor regularly was good for the health (42%), and only a small proportion believed that visiting a Chinese herbalist regularly (18%) or taking dietary supplements (15%) were good for the health either. More than two-third (68%) perceived that they were unlikely susceptible to cancer. Among the five most commonly used complementary therapies in Chinese societies, it was interesting to note that the usage rates (‘had ever used’) reported by this sample were not high: acupuncture (12%), cupping (10%), herbal medicine (28%), bone setting (25%) and Chinese massage or ‘tuina’ (14%).

Prostate cancer screening behavior

Among all respondents, only 10% confirmed that they had ever had a PSA test. The three main reasons for having the most recent PSA test were: (1) regular physical check-ups (39%); (2) prompted by local signs and symptoms (34%) and (3) physician’s recommendation (21%). The three most common reasons cited by respondents for never having had a PSA test were: (1) they did not think it was necessary (44%); (2) they did not know it was available (33%) and (3) they regarded themselves as healthy all along (8%) (). Only 4% reported that they had been recommended by health professionals for a PSA test.
Table 3

Prostate cancer screening behaviour—prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test

Characteristicsn (%)
Any health professional recommended a PSA test
  No/unsure965 (96.3)
  Yes37 (3.7)
Ever had a PSA test
  No898 (89.6)
  Yes95 (9.5)
  Unsure9 (0.9)
Among those who ever had a PSA test (n=95)
  Time since the most recent test
    <1 year  27 (28.4)
    1-2 years  28 (29.5)
    3-4 years  21 (22.1)
    5-6 years  7 (7.4)
    >6 years  7 (7.4)
    Can’t remember  5 (5.3)
  Ever had an abnormal test result
    No  81 (85.3)
    Yes  14 (14.7)
  The three main reasons for the most recent test
    Body checkup  37 (38.9)
    Prompted by local signs and symptoms*  32 (33.7)
    Doctor suggestion  20 (21.1)
Among those who have not the test (n=898)
  The three most important reasons for not having the test
    Not necessary  399 (44.4)
    Don’t know this test is available  296 (33.0)
    Healthy all along  69 (7.7)

Data are presented as frequency (%). *Difficult in micturition, frequent micturition, have pain, lumps or bleeding.

Data are presented as frequency (%). *Difficult in micturition, frequent micturition, have pain, lumps or bleeding.

Factors associated with having had a PSA test

shows the results of factors that were associated with having had a PSA test. Stepwise multivariable logistic regression, with removal and entry criteria set at P>0.1 and P<0.05 respectively, using those factors with P values <0.25 in univariate analysis as candidate independent variables revealed that employment status, use of complementary therapy, visiting a doctor regularly seen as good for health and recommendation from health professional were all significantly associated with ever having had a PSA test (). Respondents who were employed were less likely to have a PSA test [employed vs. unemployed, OR=0.4 (95% CI: 0.2-0.8), P=0.004]. Those respondents with most frequent use of complementary therapies were more likely to have a PSA test than those who had never used them [OR=2.1 (1.2-3.6), P=0.006]. Perceptions of visiting a doctor as good for health were associated with increased odds of ever having had a PSA test [OR=2.7 (1.7-4.4), P<0.001]. Finally, and remarkably, recommendations from health professionals had a very strong influence on the screening test [OR=25.9 (11.8-56.7), P<0.001].
Table 4

Factors associated with ever having had a PSA test

Ever had a PSA test, n (%)
   ORUPORA (95% CI)P
No (n=898) (%)Yes (n=95) (%)
Demographic characteristics
  Age, yrs
    50-59 (ref)  358 (94.2)  22 (5.8)1NS
    60-69  243 (89.3)  29 (10.7)1.940.024
    70-79  213 (86.2)  34 (13.8)2.600.001
    80 or above  84 (89.4)  10 (10.6)1.940.098
  Education level
    Primary or below (ref)  362 (91.6)  33 (8.4)1NS
    Secondary  374 (90.1)  41 (9.9)1.200.452
    Matriculation or above  158 (88.3)  21 (11.7)1.460.201
  Employment status
    Not employed (ref)  587 (88.4)  77 (11.6)11
    Employed  307 (94.5)  18 (5.5)0.450.0030.41 (0.22-0.75)0.004
  Monthly household income (HK$)
    <10,000 (ref)  280 (87.2)  41 (12.8)1NS
    10,000-29,999  207 (92.4)  17 (7.6)0.560.056
    ≥30,000  116 (89.9)  13 (10.1)0.770.427
    Don’t know/decline to disclose  282 (92.5)  23 (7.5)0.560.033
  Marital status
    Single/divorced/widowed (ref)  170 (91.4)  16 (8.6)1NE
    Married/cohabited  721 (90.2)  78 (9.8)1.150.628
  Family history of cancer
    No/don’t know (ref)  712 (91.5)  66 (8.5)1NS
    Yes  186 (86.5)  29 (13.5)1.680.029
Health status
  Any confirmed chronic illness?
    No (ref)  515 (92.5)  42 (7.5)1NS
    Yes  383 (87.8)  53 (12.2)1.700.015
  Ever had a serious disease or cancer?
    No (ref)  828 (91.2)  80 (8.8)1NS
    Yes  70 (82.4)  15 (17.6)2.220.010
  Smoking status
    Never smoker (ref)  499 (88.8)  63 (11.2)1NS
    Ex-smoker/current smoker  399 (92.6)  32 (7.4)0.640.046
Use of complementary therapy
  Use of complementary therapy index
    0 (≤50th percentile)499 (92.1)43 (7.9)11
    1-2 (>50th-75th percentile)189 (91.7)17 (8.3)1.040.8860.86 (0.44-1.68)0.660
    ≥3 (>75th percentile)210 (85.7)35 (14.3)1.930.0062.11 (1.24-3.57)0.006
Recommendation from health professional
  Any health professional recommended the test
    No/unsure (ref)886 (92.6)71 (7.4)   11
    Yes12 (33.3)24 (66.7)   25.0<0.00125.9 (11.8-56.7)<0.001
Health related perceptions
  Perceived health status
    Excellent/very good/good (ref)449 (92.4)37 (7.6)   1NS
    Fair/poor449 (88.6)58 (11.4)   1.570.042
  Perceived doing exercise is good for health
    No (ref)231 (93.9)15 (6.1)   1NS
    Yes667 (89.3)80 (10.7)   1.850.035
  Perceived maintaining a healthy diet is good for health
    No (ref)309 (93.1)23 (6.9)   1NS
    Yes589 (89.1)72 (10.9)   1.640.047
  Perceived visiting a doctor regularly is good for health
    No (ref)544 (94.6)31 (5.4)   11
    Yes354 (84.7)64 (15.3)   3.17<0.0012.68 (1.65-4.38)<0.001
  Perceived visiting a Chinese herbalist regularly is good for health
    No (ref)743 (91.4)70 (8.6)   1NS
    Yes155 (86.1)25 (13.9)   1.710.031
  Perceived taking dietary supplements is good for health
    No (ref)768 (91.3)73 (8.7)   1NS
    Yes130 (85.5)22 (14.5)   1.780.027
  Perceived susceptibility to cancer (ranged from 1=not at all likely to 10=extremely likely)
    ≤5 (ref)614 (91.6)56 (8.4)   1NS
    >568 (85.0)12 (15.0)   1.930.054
    Unsure216 (88.9)27 (11.1)   1.370.202

ref, Reference group of the categorical variable; ORU, univariate odds ratio; ORA, odds ratio adjusted for other significant factors obtained from stepwise logistic regression analysis using variables with P value <0.25 in univariate analysis as candidate variables; NS, not statistically significant in multivariate analysis; NE, not entered into multivariable analysis; PSA, prostate-specific antigen.

ref, Reference group of the categorical variable; ORU, univariate odds ratio; ORA, odds ratio adjusted for other significant factors obtained from stepwise logistic regression analysis using variables with P value <0.25 in univariate analysis as candidate variables; NS, not statistically significant in multivariate analysis; NE, not entered into multivariable analysis; PSA, prostate-specific antigen.

Discussion

Uptake of PSA testing

The uptake rate of PSA testing was 10%, lower than in other studies conducted in comparable groups,. The three main reasons for having the test were ‘regular physical check-ups’, ‘presence of unusual signs and symptoms’, and ‘doctor’s recommendation’. On the other hand, respondents had not undergone the test because they perceived the test was ‘not necessary’, they ‘did not know the test was available’ or they considered they were ‘healthy all along’. The findings reflect the respondents lacked knowledge and had misconceptions about prostate cancer and the benefits of screening. Similar results have also been reported by other studies, indicating that a lack of knowledge and faulty perceptions of prostate cancer risk influence males in adopting certain health behavior,,. Another possible reason may be insufficient health promotion and education of the public—only 3.7% (n=37) of the respondents received recommendations from health professionals for a PSA test. In fact, the Cancer Expert Working Group on Cancer Prevention and Screening concluded that insufficient scientific evidence was available to recommend whether or not prostate cancer screening in asymptomatic men should be carried out. Men are therefore encouraged to discuss with their doctors the benefits and risks of such screening. However, lack of knowledge about prostate cancer in men and insufficient health promotion of prostate cancer screening may hinder men’s awareness and compliance of the recommendation.

Factors associated with PSA testing

Respondents more likely to have had a PSA test were those who were unemployed, used complementary therapies for health promotion and restoration, perceived visiting a doctor regularly as good for health or had received a recommendation from health professionals. It was interesting to find that unemployed respondents were more likely to take a PSA test. Perhaps employment status may be directly or indirectly related to age. The results of univariate analysis showed that respondents aged 50-59 were less likely to take a PSA test than those aged 60-79, though the result was not significant in multivariate analysis. Further studies are needed to get a clearer picture of the perceptions and attitudes towards having a PSA test among older adults who are or are not employed. The use of complementary therapy was another associated factor identified in multivariate analysis. In Chinese societies, various complementary therapies are commonly used to promote and restore health, which may be why those who have resorted to such complementary measures are more receptive to undergoing a PSA test. Regarding regular visits to a doctor as good for health and recommendations from health professionals were two important factors associated with the uptake of PSA testing. In particular, the odds of test uptake were 25.9 times better among participants who had received recommendations from health professionals than among those who had not. Similar results have been produced by other studies conducted with comparable age groups,. Health professionals should therefore take up a significant role in health promotion and education to increase awareness of cancer prevention and detection among the male population in Hong Kong. They would also be expected to explain and discuss the potential benefits and risks of PSA testing to help their patients come to a decision.

Limitations

There are several limitations to this study. First, it uses a cross-sectional survey design, which makes it difficult to establish the causality and identify the predictors of PSA testing uptake. Second, other factors that may be associated with the uptake, such as a history of benign prostate hypertrophy or a family history of prostate cancer, were not included. Third, recall bias exists in self-report data. Last, but not the least important, data collected from a self-report survey, such as questions about having ever had a PSA test or being recommended by a health professional, were not validated.

Conclusion

This study reported the uptake rate of PSA testing, which was very low, and identified associated factors among older Chinese men. After adjusting for confounding variables, those respondents who were not employed, used complementary therapy, perceived visiting a doctor regularly as good for health and had been recommended by a health professional were found to be more likely to have a PSA test. Among all the factors identified, recommendations from health professionals showed the strongest association with PSA test uptake in this population. Health professionals should take an active role in educating this particular population in cancer prevention and detection.
  21 in total

1.  Perspective on prostate cancer screening.

Authors:  C Stewart Rogers
Journal:  Int J Clin Pract       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 2.503

2.  Factors influencing prostate cancer screening in low-income African Americans in Tennessee.

Authors:  Kushal Patel; Donna Kenerson; Hong Wang; Byron Brown; Helen Pinkerton; Marilyn Burress; Leslie Cooper; Marie Canto; Flora Ukoli; Margaret Hargreaves
Journal:  J Health Care Poor Underserved       Date:  2010-02

3.  Colorectal cancer screening behaviour and associated factors among Chinese aged 50 and above in Hong Kong - a population-based survey.

Authors:  W K W So; K C Choi; D N S Chan; A T Y Shiu; S S M Ho; H Y L Chan; W W T Lam; K K F Cheng; W Goggins; C W H Chan
Journal:  Eur J Oncol Nurs       Date:  2011-10-28       Impact factor: 2.398

4.  Lifetime and recent prostate specific antigen (PSA) screening of men for prostate cancer in Canada.

Authors:  Jennifer A Beaulac; Richard N Fry; Jay Onysko
Journal:  Can J Public Health       Date:  2006 May-Jun

5.  Factors influencing men's decisions regarding prostate cancer screening: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Jeanne M Ferrante; Eric K Shaw; John G Scott
Journal:  J Community Health       Date:  2011-10

6.  Reasons why patients reject digital rectal examination when screening for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Frederico R Romero; Karen Richter P Santos Romero; Filho Thadeu Brenny; Roberto Pilati; David Kulysz; Fernando César de Oliveira Júnior
Journal:  Arch Esp Urol       Date:  2008 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 0.436

Review 7.  Critical appraisal of prostate-specific antigen in prostate cancer screening: 20 years later.

Authors:  Kenneth J Pienta
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 2.649

Review 8.  Screening for prostate cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Authors:  Mia Djulbegovic; Rebecca J Beyth; Molly M Neuberger; Taryn L Stoffs; Johannes Vieweg; Benjamin Djulbegovic; Philipp Dahm
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2010-09-14

9.  Factors related to use of prostate cancer screening: the Alberta Tomorrow Project.

Authors:  Harriet Richardson; Kristan J Aronson; Alison James; Elizabeth S McGregor; Heather Bryant
Journal:  Open Med       Date:  2007-04-14

10.  Decision-making about PSA testing and prostate biopsies: a qualitative study embedded in a primary care randomised trial.

Authors:  Kerry N L Avery; Jane M Blazeby; J Athene Lane; David E Neal; Freddie C Hamdy; Jenny L Donovan
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2007-08-15       Impact factor: 20.096

View more
  7 in total

1.  Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening rates and factors associated with screening in Eastern Canadian men: Findings from cross-sectional survey data.

Authors:  Devan Tchir; Marwa Farag; Michael Szafron
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2020-07       Impact factor: 1.862

2.  Prostate Specific Antigen and Prostate Cancer in Chinese Men Undergoing Initial Prostate Biopsies Compared with Western Cohorts.

Authors:  Rui Chen; Daniel D Sjoberg; Yiran Huang; Liping Xie; Liqun Zhou; Dalin He; Andrew J Vickers; Yinghao Sun
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2016-09-02       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 3.  Men's perspectives of prostate cancer screening: A systematic review of qualitative studies.

Authors:  Laura J James; Germaine Wong; Jonathan C Craig; Camilla S Hanson; Angela Ju; Kirsten Howard; Tim Usherwood; Howard Lau; Allison Tong
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-11-28       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Time trends in prostate cancer screening in Swiss primary care (2010 to 2017) - A retrospective study.

Authors:  Stefan Zechmann; Stefania Di Gangi; Vladimir Kaplan; Rahel Meier; Thomas Rosemann; Fabio Valeri; Oliver Senn
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-06-13       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  A Mixed-Method Study Examining Cancer Screening Uptake among South Asian Ethnic Minorities in Hong Kong.

Authors:  Winnie K W So; Bernard M H Law; Kai Chow Choi; Dorothy N S Chan; Carmen W H Chan
Journal:  Asia Pac J Oncol Nurs       Date:  2019-09-11

6.  Prevalence and Risk Factors of Prostate Cancer in Chinese Men with PSA 4-10 ng/mL Who Underwent TRUS-Guided Prostate Biopsy: The Utilization of PAMD Score.

Authors:  Dong Fang; Da Ren; Chenglin Zhao; Xuesong Li; Wei Yu; Rui Wang; Huihui Wang; Chenguang Xi; Qun He; Xiaoying Wang; Zhongcheng Xin; Liqun Zhou
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2015-10-18       Impact factor: 3.411

7.  Prostate specific antigen test uptake: a cross sectional study on elderly men in Western Iran.

Authors:  Mehdi Mirzaei-Alavijeh; Farzad Jalilian; Laleh Solaimanizadeh; Abdollah Saadatfar; Shima Khashij; Razieh Pirouzeh; Farzaneh Solaimanizadeh
Journal:  BMC Geriatr       Date:  2020-08-24       Impact factor: 3.921

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.