Encouraging Patients to Ask Questions: Development and Pilot Testing of a Question Prompt List for Patients Undergoing a Biopsy for Suspected Prostate Cancer
, Allan ‘Ben’ Smith 1,2,*, Peter Chong 3, Pascal Mancuso 4,5, Verena Shuwen Wu 1,2, Mark Sidhom 2,4, Karen Wong 2,4, Diana Ngo 4, Paul Gassner 5 and Afaf Girgis 1,2
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In this study Rincones et al. developed a 26 item Question Prompt List and evaluated its acceptability and feasibility to facilitate treatment related decision making in patients with suspected localised prostate cancer.
Authors report a >70% high content satisfaction and >60% perceived usefullness among participants, indicating the potential and applicability of their QPL.
The study design, methodology, presentation of results, and discussion are sceintifically sound and adequate. Findings are novel and open up new research avenues.
This is a high quality manuscript and I recommend its acceptance for publication in its present form
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
This study evaluated the acceptability and feasibility of a Question Prompt List (QPL) to facilitate informed treatment decision-making in men with suspected localized prostate cancer, which involves values-based choices between options with similar efficacy, but different side effects. .
This work is well presented however, in my opinion, the fact that only 18.4% of eligible men received the QPL, not only depends on the need for a greater involvement of doctors but, probably, the audience to which it can be addressed is very more limited for various reasons such as social and cultural differences, greater sensitivity of the subjects which must be evaluated from time to time by the doctor.
A questionnaire can remove that feeling of empathy that develops between doctor and patient, almost turn them into a number and not just one person.
It could be useful for doctors to understand which are the most frequent questions that patients ask themselves and therefore anticipate their answers.
I do not believe that the questionnaire as it stands can be used on a large scale.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
The present work assesses the acceptability and feasibility of a QPL in patients facing treatment for localized prostate carcinoma. Acceptability was answered by study-specific questions, and feasibility was answered by the completion rate of QPL forms. Overall, there was satisfactory acceptability with poor feasibility.
The work is written in a scientifically elaborated way.
The topic certainly has a high relevance for clinical work and the reduction of anxiety for patients. However, the small sample is not sufficient to assess universally feasibility and acceptance. Of course, this is not the aim of this pilot study.
Table 1: Is age represented by median or by arithmetic mean? The specification of an SD and a range confuse
I would like to see a larger sample for the important questions in the paper. Since QPLs seem reasonable for other tumor entities, there is no need to ask about feasibility in my view. Endpoints such as QOL or reduction in anxiety would be more interesting.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors provided an adequate response to my concerns and revised the article accordingly.
Some doubts remain regarding the use of the questionnaire, but believes that in this form the article may be accepted.
