IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0227304.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating two decision aids for Australian men supporting informed decisions about prostate cancer screening: A randomised controlled trial

Author

Listed:
  • Kristen Pickles
  • Luise Kazda
  • Alexandra Barratt
  • Kevin McGeechan
  • Jolyn Hersch
  • Kirsten McCaffery

Abstract

Background: Australian clinicians are advised to ‘offer evidence-based decisional support to men considering whether or not to have a PSA test’. This randomised trial compared the performance and acceptability of two new decision aids (DAs) to aid men in making informed choices about PSA screening. Methods: ~3000 Australian men 45–60 years with varying educational attainment were recruited via an online panel and randomised to view one of two online decision aids (one full length, one abbreviated) and completed a questionnaire. The primary outcome was informed choice about PSA screening. Findings: Significantly more men in the long DA group (38%) made an informed choice than men who received the shorter DA (33%) (95% CI 1.1% to 8.2%; p = 0.008). On knowledge, the long DA group scored, on average, 0.45 points higher than the short DA group (95% CI 0.14 to 0.76; p = 0.004) and 5% more of the participants achieved an adequate knowledge score (95% CI 1.9% to 8.8%; p = 0.002). Men allocated the long DA were less likely to intend to have a PSA test in the future (53%) than men in the short DA group (59%). Both DAs rated highly on acceptability. Conclusions: Both DAs were useful and acceptable to men regardless of education level and both supported informed decision making. The long version resulted in higher knowledge, and a higher proportion of men able to make an informed choice, but the differences were small. Long DAs may be useful for men whose informational needs are not satisfied by a short DA.

Suggested Citation

  • Kristen Pickles & Luise Kazda & Alexandra Barratt & Kevin McGeechan & Jolyn Hersch & Kirsten McCaffery, 2020. "Evaluating two decision aids for Australian men supporting informed decisions about prostate cancer screening: A randomised controlled trial," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(1), pages 1-15, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0227304
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0227304
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0227304
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0227304&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0227304?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0227304. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.