Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014 Jun 1;89(2):277-83. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.02.001. Epub 2014 Mar 27.

Perceptions of radiation oncologists and urologists on sources and type of evidence to inform prostate cancer treatment decisions.

Author information

1
Division of Health Care Policy and Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
2
Department of Urology, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut.
3
HealthPartners, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
4
Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota; Biomedical Ethics Program, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota; Division of General Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
5
Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
6
Division of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
7
Cancer Outcomes and Public Policy Effectiveness Research Center, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut; Department of Internal Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut.
8
Cancer Outcomes and Public Policy Effectiveness Research Center, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut; Department of Radiation Oncology, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut.
9
Division of Urology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard University, Boston, Massachusetts.
10
Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada.
11
Division of Urology, Alfred Hospital, Prahran, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
12
Department of Urology, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut; Cancer Outcomes and Public Policy Effectiveness Research Center, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut. Electronic address: simkim@me.com.

Abstract

PURPOSE:

To perform a national survey of radiation oncologists and urologists about the type of resources used and the level of evidence needed to change clinical practice in localized prostate cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS:

From a random sample, 1422 physicians were mailed a survey assessing the types of information used and what level of evidence could alter their clinical practice in prostate cancer. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify differences in physician characteristics for each outcome.

RESULTS:

Survey response rates were similar for radiation oncologists and urologists (44% vs 46%; P=.46). Specialty-specific journals represented the most commonly used resource for informing the clinical practice for radiation oncologists (65%) and urologists (70%). Relative to radiation oncologists, urologists were less likely to report utilizing top-tier medical journals (25% vs 39%; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.50; P=.01) or cancer journals (22% vs 51%; adjusted OR 0.50; P<.001) but more likely to rely on clinical guidelines (46% vs 38%; adjusted OR 1.6; P=.006). Both radiation oncologists and urologists most commonly reported large randomized, clinical trials as the level of evidence to change treatment recommendations for localized prostate cancer (85% vs 77%; P=.009).

CONCLUSIONS:

Both specialties rely on their own specialty-specific journals and view randomized, clinical trials as the level of evidence needed to change clinical practice. Our study provides a context on meaningful ways of disseminating evidence for localized prostate cancer.

PMID:
24685153
DOI:
10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.02.001
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Elsevier Science
    Loading ...
    Support Center