Search

Objective: \ud \ud To develop a core outcome set (COS) applicable for effectiveness trials of all interventions for localised prostate cancer.\ud Background: \ud \ud Many treatments exist for localised prostate cancer, although it is unclear which offers the optimal therapeutic ratio. This is confounded by inconsistencies in the selection, definition, measurement and reporting of outcomes in clinical trials.\ud Subjects and methods: \ud \ud A list of 79 outcomes was derived from a systematic review of published localised prostate cancer effectiveness studies and semi-structured interviews with 15 prostate cancer patients. A two-stage consensus process involving 118 patients and 56 international healthcare professionals (HCPs) (cancer specialist nurses, urological surgeons and oncologists) was undertaken, consisting of a three-round Delphi survey followed by a face-to-face consensus panel meeting of 13 HCPs and 8 patients.\ud Results: \ud \ud The final COS included 19 outcomes. Twelve apply to all interventions: death from prostate cancer, death from any cause, local disease recurrence, distant disease recurrence/metastases, disease progression, need for salvage therapy, overall quality of life, stress urinary incontinence, urinary function, bowel function, faecal incontinence, sexual function. Seven were intervention-specific: perioperative deaths (surgery), positive surgical margin (surgery), thromboembolic disease (surgery), bothersome or symptomatic urethral or anastomotic stricture (surgery), need for curative treatment (active surveillance), treatment failure (ablative therapy), and side effects of hormonal therapy (hormone therapy). The UK-centric participants may limit the generalisability to other countries, but trialists should reason why the COS would not be applicable. The default position should not be that a COS developed in one country will automatically not be applicable elsewhere.\ud Conclusion: \ud \ud We have established a COS for trials of effectiveness in localised prostate cancer, applicable across all interventions which should be measured in all localised prostate cancer effectiveness trials.

Purpose – This paper aims to re-examine the determinants of ecologically conscious consumer behaviour (ECCB) by analysing the green consumer profile (socio-demographic and psychographic variables), building on the work of Straughan and Roberts. Moreover, the study explores the determinants of effective green purchase behaviour (GPB) considering ECCB and green purchase intention (GPI) previously evaluated. Design/methodology/approach – The authors conducted a quantitative study based on an online survey. Data collection was implemented in two different phases: in the first phase ECCB, GPI and profiling variables were measured. One month later, the same respondents evaluated their effective GPB. Through path analysis the effects of ECCB and GPI on GPB were measured. Findings – The results show that psychographic variables, with emphasis on perceived consumer effectiveness (PCE) and altruism, are more relevant than socio-demographics in explaining ECCB. The consumers with higher ECCB have shown higher green purchase intention (GPI). ECCB has a positive impact on GBP, higher than GPI, which in turn mediates that relationship. Research limitations/implications – The research results may lack generalizability. Therefore, researchers are encouraged to test the proposed propositions further. Practical implications – The paper provides evidence that whenever ecological consciousness is high, the gap between GPI and GPB is less evident, which provides clear evidence that an understanding of green consumer profiles and behaviour can enable organizations to respond better to new management challenges. Originality/value – This paper provides a comprehensive understanding about the green consumer profile and behaviour, including the effect of GPI on GPB, and which contribute to the coordination of future marketing strategies to target this segment. info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion