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

Leona C. Han, Sophia Delpe, Nilay D Shah, Jeanette Y. Ziegenfuss, Jon C Tilburt, Robert Jeffrey Karnes, Paul L. Nguyen, Cary P. Gross, James B. Yu, Quoc Dien Trinh, Maxine Sun, Weranja K B Ranasinghe, Simon P. Kim

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)277-283
Number of pages7
JournalInternational Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics
Volume89
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 1 2014

Fingerprint

Prostatic Neoplasms
cancer
radiation
physicians
Odds Ratio
resources
Randomized Controlled Trials
Logistic Models
Physicians
Therapeutics
logistics
recommendations
regression analysis
Radiation Oncologists
Urologists
Guidelines
Surveys and Questionnaires
Neoplasms

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Radiation
  • Cancer Research

Cite this

Perceptions of radiation oncologists and urologists on sources and type of evidence to inform prostate cancer treatment decisions. / Han, Leona C.; Delpe, Sophia; Shah, Nilay D; Ziegenfuss, Jeanette Y.; Tilburt, Jon C; Karnes, Robert Jeffrey; Nguyen, Paul L.; Gross, Cary P.; Yu, James B.; Trinh, Quoc Dien; Sun, Maxine; Ranasinghe, Weranja K B; Kim, Simon P.

In: International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics, Vol. 89, No. 2, 01.06.2014, p. 277-283.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Han, Leona C. ; Delpe, Sophia ; Shah, Nilay D ; Ziegenfuss, Jeanette Y. ; Tilburt, Jon C ; Karnes, Robert Jeffrey ; Nguyen, Paul L. ; Gross, Cary P. ; Yu, James B. ; Trinh, Quoc Dien ; Sun, Maxine ; Ranasinghe, Weranja K B ; Kim, Simon P. / Perceptions of radiation oncologists and urologists on sources and type of evidence to inform prostate cancer treatment decisions. In: International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics. 2014 ; Vol. 89, No. 2. pp. 277-283.
@article{de85a45ab2f2421aa4c970c17788e6a1,
title = "Perceptions of radiation oncologists and urologists on sources and type of evidence to inform prostate cancer treatment decisions",
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.",
author = "Han, {Leona C.} and Sophia Delpe and Shah, {Nilay D} and Ziegenfuss, {Jeanette Y.} and Tilburt, {Jon C} and Karnes, {Robert Jeffrey} and Nguyen, {Paul L.} and Gross, {Cary P.} and Yu, {James B.} and Trinh, {Quoc Dien} and Maxine Sun and Ranasinghe, {Weranja K B} and Kim, {Simon P.}",
year = "2014",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.02.001",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "89",
pages = "277--283",
journal = "International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics",
issn = "0360-3016",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Perceptions of radiation oncologists and urologists on sources and type of evidence to inform prostate cancer treatment decisions

AU - Han, Leona C.

AU - Delpe, Sophia

AU - Shah, Nilay D

AU - Ziegenfuss, Jeanette Y.

AU - Tilburt, Jon C

AU - Karnes, Robert Jeffrey

AU - Nguyen, Paul L.

AU - Gross, Cary P.

AU - Yu, James B.

AU - Trinh, Quoc Dien

AU - Sun, Maxine

AU - Ranasinghe, Weranja K B

AU - Kim, Simon P.

PY - 2014/6/1

Y1 - 2014/6/1

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84899978480&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84899978480&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.02.001

DO - 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.02.001

M3 - Article

VL - 89

SP - 277

EP - 283

JO - International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics

JF - International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics

SN - 0360-3016

IS - 2

ER -