PD19-04 IMPACT OF NOVEL PATIENT-CENTERED PATHOLOGY REPORTS ON MEN UNDERGOING PROSTATE BIOPSY: THE PAPR RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
You have accessJournal of UrologyProstate Cancer: Detection & Screening II (PD19)1 May 2024PD19-04 IMPACT OF NOVEL PATIENT-CENTERED PATHOLOGY REPORTS ON MEN UNDERGOING PROSTATE BIOPSY: THE PAPR RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL Ravi M Kumar, Katherine Lajkosz, Amalia Silberman, Antonio Finelli, Neil Fleshner, Robert Hamilton, Girish Kulkarni, Alexandre Zlotta, Alejandro Berlin, Janet Papadakos, Sangeet Ghai, Dominik Deniffel, David Wiljer, Shabbir Alibhai, Joseph Cafazzo, Masoom Haider, Odelia Lee, Lauren Calicchia, Isabella Janusonis, Mike Lovas, Jayson Kreidstein, Jenna Hiemstra, and Nathan Perlis Ravi M KumarRavi M Kumar , Katherine LajkoszKatherine Lajkosz , Amalia SilbermanAmalia Silberman , Antonio FinelliAntonio Finelli , Neil FleshnerNeil Fleshner , Robert HamiltonRobert Hamilton , Girish KulkarniGirish Kulkarni , Alexandre ZlottaAlexandre Zlotta , Alejandro BerlinAlejandro Berlin , Janet PapadakosJanet Papadakos , Sangeet GhaiSangeet Ghai , Dominik DeniffelDominik Deniffel , David WiljerDavid Wiljer , Shabbir AlibhaiShabbir Alibhai , Joseph CafazzoJoseph Cafazzo , Masoom HaiderMasoom Haider , Odelia LeeOdelia Lee , Lauren CalicchiaLauren Calicchia , Isabella JanusonisIsabella Janusonis , Mike LovasMike Lovas , Jayson KreidsteinJayson Kreidstein , Jenna HiemstraJenna Hiemstra , and Nathan PerlisNathan Perlis View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/01.JU.0001009448.41537.64.04AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Increasingly, patients can access their medical results in real-time through online portals. In prostate cancer care, clinical decisions hinge on biopsy reports. Standard pathology reports (SPRs) use language that can be difficult for patients to understand. In collaboration with patients and experts (surgeons, radiation oncologists, pathologists, health educators, healthcare design engineers and plain language specialists), our group developed patient-centered pathology reports (PAPR) for prostate biopsy. This study assesses whether prostate biopsy PAPRs improves patient experience, understanding, and shared decision-making. METHODS: 63 patients undergoing prostate biopsy were randomized 1:1 to SPR or SPR+PAPR. Individualized PAPRs were sent to patients within 48 hours of the SPR becoming available. Patients completed an investigator designed questionnaire prior to their follow-up encounter, and a validated shared decision-making (SDM-Q-9) and anxiety (STAI-5) questionnaire after the encounter. Differences in continuous variables were assessed using the Mann-Whitney U test; differences in categorical variables were assessed using Fisher's Exact test or Chi-squared test. RESULTS: There were no significant demographic differences at baseline between groups. Most patients were 60-69 years old (55%), had undergraduate education (66%), and were undergoing their first prostate biopsy (45%). More patients receiving SPR+PAPR vs. SPR agreed that their reports were patient friendly (75 vs. 18%, p=0.01), made them feel in control (71 vs. 12%, p=0.01), lowered their anxiety about their prostate condition (86 vs. 9%, p<0.001), and was useful for communicating results to family and friends (82 vs. 45%, p=0.01). Patients in the SPR+PAPR group displayed a greater understanding of their condition (mean of 3.9 vs. 3.2 correct answers; p=0.02) and available treatment options (61% vs. 16%, p<0.001). Mean SDM-Q-9 and STAIS-5 scores were similar between groups; however, more patients receiving PAPRs agreed that their doctor and them reached an agreement on how to proceed after the first follow-up visit (100% vs. 73%, p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Receiving individualized, patient-centred pathology reports can improve knowledge and experience for men undergoing prostate biopsy. Download PPT Source of Funding: Dr. Kumar was awarded $50,000 through the Hold'em for life oncology fellowship at the University of Toronto's Temerty Faculty of Medicine and partner hospitals. This value has been matched by the study investigator for the purposes of this study © 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 211Issue 5SMay 2024Page: e440 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Metrics Author Information Ravi M Kumar More articles by this author Katherine Lajkosz More articles by this author Amalia Silberman More articles by this author Antonio Finelli More articles by this author Neil Fleshner More articles by this author Robert Hamilton More articles by this author Girish Kulkarni More articles by this author Alexandre Zlotta More articles by this author Alejandro Berlin More articles by this author Janet Papadakos More articles by this author Sangeet Ghai More articles by this author Dominik Deniffel More articles by this author David Wiljer More articles by this author Shabbir Alibhai More articles by this author Joseph Cafazzo More articles by this author Masoom Haider More articles by this author Odelia Lee More articles by this author Lauren Calicchia More articles by this author Isabella Janusonis More articles by this author Mike Lovas More articles by this author Jayson Kreidstein More articles by this author Jenna Hiemstra More articles by this author Nathan Perlis More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,007 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,006 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,015 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».