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

Kristen Pickles, Luise Kazda, Alexandra Barratt, Kevin McGeechan, Jolyn Hersch, Kirsten McCaffery

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

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.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere0227304
Pages (from-to)1-15
Number of pages15
JournalPLoS One
Volume15
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 15 Jan 2020
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Evaluating two decision aids for Australian men supporting informed decisions about prostate cancer screening: A randomised controlled trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this