PMID- 37300168
OWN - NLM
STAT- PubMed-not-MEDLINE
LR  - 20230612
IS  - 2352-0787 (Electronic)
IS  - 2352-0779 (Linking)
VI  - 5
IP  - 1
DP  - 2018 Jan
TI  - News Media Analysis of the United States Preventive Services Task Force and 
      American Urological Association Prostate Cancer Screening Guidelines.
PG  - 24-30
LID - 10.1016/j.urpr.2016.12.001 [doi]
AB  - INTRODUCTION: Rates of prostate specific antigen screening and prostate cancer 
      diagnoses have declined following controversial changes to prostate cancer 
      screening guidelines by the USPSTF (U.S. Preventive Services Task Force) in 2011 
      and 2012 advising against all prostate specific antigen screening. To understand 
      whether uneven media coverage of the guidelines may have influenced shifts in 
      clinical decision making, this study analyzes news reports about the USPSTF and 
      AUA (American Urological Association) prostate cancer screening guidelines. 
      METHODS: Two national databases were queried for news articles published within 
      30 days of the release of each guideline. Media analysis included consequences of 
      screening, accuracy of guideline descriptions, discussion of primary evidence and 
      neutrality of headlines. Thematic changes between the preliminary and final 
      USPSTF guidelines were compared. RESULTS: Of the 45 news articles in the sample 
      24 were about the preliminary USPSTF guidelines, 17 about the final USPSTF 
      guidelines and 4 about the revised AUA guidelines. More than 80% of the articles 
      discussed adverse consequences of prostate specific antigen screening while a 
      minority accurately summarized the recommendations or discussed limitations of 
      the evidence. Significantly more articles about the final vs preliminary USPSTF 
      guidelines had headlines opposing screening or suggested urologists' financial 
      gains from prostate specific antigen tests (p <0.05). Of the articles that 
      mentioned the initial opposition of the AUA to the USPSTF, only 29% described the 
      current AUA guidelines in any form. CONCLUSIONS: The USPSTF guidelines were more 
      extensively reported in the news than the AUA guidelines. Articles frequently 
      emphasized the negative aspects of screening and did not discuss limitations of 
      the evidence. These findings may have influenced patients' decisions underlying 
      declines in prostate specific antigen screening since 2011.
FAU - Koo, Kevin
AU  - Koo K
AD  - Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire. ES-UID: 
      S2352077916302795-8b6672a524d5cbb64aa5379b77c85abd
FAU - Shee, Kevin
AU  - Shee K
AD  - Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, New Hampshire. ES-UID: 
      S2352077916302795-347df5fcf4e81538a94eb9a8b77b75fd
FAU - Yap, Ronald L
AU  - Yap RL
AD  - Concord Hospital Center for Urologic Care, Concord, New Hampshire. ES-UID: 
      S2352077916302795-96a7db22120a0f67b512ecbbed3aa39d
LA  - eng
PT  - Journal Article
DEP - 20161212
PL  - United States
TA  - Urol Pract
JT  - Urology practice
JID - 101635343
SB  - IM
OTO - NOTNLM
OT  - advisory committees
OT  - guidelines as topic
OT  - prostate-specific antigen
OT  - prostatic neoplasms
EDAT- 2018/01/01 00:00
MHDA- 2018/01/01 00:01
CRDT- 2023/06/10 01:26
PHST- 2018/01/01 00:01 [medline]
PHST- 2018/01/01 00:00 [pubmed]
PHST- 2023/06/10 01:26 [entrez]
AID - 10.1016/j.urpr.2016.12.001 [doi]
PST - ppublish
SO  - Urol Pract. 2018 Jan;5(1):24-30. doi: 10.1016/j.urpr.2016.12.001. Epub 2016 Dec 
      12.