Alternate definitions of adverse pathology to predict a very high risk of metastasis in men with intermediate- and low-risk prostate cancer.

Background: Adverse pathology (AP) is often used as an intermediate end point for long-term outcomes in men with prostate cancer (PCa) who are active surveillance candidates. The association between a commonly used AP definition and long-term outcomes was tested, which identified definitions more strongly linked to a high risk of metastasis.

Methods: Data were reviewed from the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital cohort of men undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) from 1988 to 2020 at nine Veterans Affairs hospitals.

Metabolic syndrome is associated with aggressive prostate cancer regardless of race.

Purpose: Recent meta-analyses suggest the Metabolic Syndrome (MS) increases high-grade prostate cancer (PC), although studies are inconsistent and few black men were included. We investigated MS and PC diagnosis in black and white men undergoing prostate biopsy in an equal access healthcare system. We hypothesized MS would be linked with aggressive PC, regardless of race.

Correcting eyewitness suggestibility: does explanatory role predict resistance to correction?

Many studies have documented that exposure to post event misinformation can lead eyewitnesses to misremember witnessing events they did not see and do so with high confidence. The goal of the present study was to investigate whether reporting of suggested misinformation can be reversed following a correction, and if so, whether misinformation would be more resistant to correction when it serves an explanatory function than when it does not. In two experiments participants witnessed an event, were exposed to a blatantly false suggestion(s) and one week later received a correction followed by a test of their memory for the witnessed event.

Does evaluating belief prior to its retraction influence the efficacy of later corrections?

News stories unfold over time, with initial reports sometimes containing mistaken accounts of the newsworthy outcome that are ultimately revised or corrected. Because facts associated with newsworthy events are accumulated in this piecemeal fashion, readers often have repeated opportunities to reflect upon, discuss, and evaluate their belief in these accounts before they learn that initial news reports have been revised or retracted. The primary goal of the present study was to assess whether rating the strength of one's belief in the initially reported, mistaken cause might influence the efficacy of a later correction.