signpost iconThe diagnosis, management, treatment and costs of prostate cancer in England and Wales: a review

Authors: Chamberlain J, Melia J, Moss S, Brown J

Bottom Line:

The incidence of prostate cancer is increasing worldwide due to the growing elderly population and because of increased testing for prostate cancer. The major databases and bibliographic sources were searched for relevant articles together with meetings with specialists.

Publication details:

The number of men requiring care for prostate cancer and the burden of the disease on all sectors of health care will increase over the next decade. The effectiveness of screening is not proven, and a national screening programme is not justified on current evidence. In addition, the effectiveness of different methods of management of localised disease is not known, so any randomised trial of screening should also address the question of treatment.

We assessed this page using an appraisal instrument developed by Minervation specifically for this project. This approach is still in development, so you should regard the assessments as a general guide. Click here to find out more, or to let us know how you think the approach could be improved.

Reliability comments:

  • Please note that these data relate to the 1990s.
  • The page is not updated regularly.
  • It is clear who has produced this website
  • One key feature of a robust control procedure is not reported

Usability comments:

  • PDF only, print copies can be purchased.
  • The website does not conform to web accessibility standards
  • Searching this website could be made easier

Scoring

Reliability
Item Score
Is it clear who has developed the web site and what their objectives are? 3
There is a section detailing who NCCHTA are, and a section explaining about the HTA programme.
Does the site report a robust quality control procedure? 2
It doesn't state explicitly in their methods section that there is searching and appraising involved in their methodology.
Is the page content checked by an expert? 3
Cannot tell if the content has been checked by an expert.
Is the page updated regularly? 0
The page is not updated regularly.
Does the page cite relevant sources where appropriate? 3
Relevant sources are cited.
Usability
Item Score
Is the site accessible without a login? 3
No registration required.
Does the site conform to web Accessibility standards? 2
Lida score 94%
Is the site design clear and transparent? 1
The font size on the homepage is very small, especially the left hand menu. The options on the left hand menu are not very intuitive. It is not easy to work your way around the site. It is not apparent straight away how you might browse content. Publication information for each HTA looks messy.
Is the site design consistent from one page to another? 2
Site design is mostly consistent, except that the font style, size and colour changes which can be distracting.
Can users find what they need on the site? 2
it is not easy to browse content. Users have to look closely on the homepage to see a link for this. Publications are not ordered by topic and appear as one continuous long list. The search box looks overly complicated. Search results are displayed reasonably well. It is unclear how results are ranked.
Is the format of information clear and appropriate for the audience? 1
The format is clear.
Weighted total (Usability + (Reliability x 2)): 33
We score each question out of three where:
0 = Never or Can't tell
1 = Sometimes or partly
2 = Mostly
3 = Always

Date rated

Source

National Coordinating Centre for Health Technology Assessment (NCCHTA)

Currency

Inadequate

Audience

Health professionals

Publication Type

Systematic review

Format

PDF Document

Reliability

4 stars

Usability

3 stars

Find: Similar

Contact us about this summary

Your comment or question:
G6H3KW