An entertainment-education colorectal cancer screening decision aid for African American patients: A randomized controlled trial

Video Interventions for Reducing Health Inequity in Cancer Screening Programmes: a Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Health equity can lead to disparities in cancer screening, treatment, and mortality. This systematic review aims to identify and describe interventions that used video or DVD formats to reduce health inequity in cancer screening and review the effectiveness of such interventions in increasing screening rates compared to usual care conditions.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane databases for randomized control trials (RCTs) published until 18/01/2023 that compared intervention versus usual care control groups, with the percentage of cancer screening uptake during follow-up as an outcome. The risk of Bias was assessed with the Cochrane Collaboration tool.

RESULTS

After screening 4201 abstracts, 192 full texts were assessed for eligibility and 18 were included that focused on colorectal (n = 9), cervical (n = 5), breast (n = 5), and prostate (n = 1) cancer screening. All were based in the USA except one and most focused on ethnicity/race, while some included low-income populations. Most of the video interventions used to increase cervical cancer screening reported positive results. Studies aimed at increasing mammography uptake were mostly effective only in specific groups of participants, such as low-income or less-educated African American women. Results for colorectal cancer screening were conflicting. Videos that were culturally tailored or used emotive format were generally more effective than information-only videos.

CONCLUSIONS

Video interventions to increase cancer screening among populations with low screening uptake show some positive effects, though results are mixed. Interventions that use individual and cultural tailoring of the educational material should be further developed and investigated outside of the USA.

Websites about, not for, adolescents? A systematic analysis of online fertility preservation information for adolescent and young adult cancer patients

PURPOSE

Fertility preservation is an increasingly important topic in adolescent and young adult cancer survivorship, yet treatments remain under-utilized, possibly due to lack of awareness and understanding. The internet is widely used by adolescents and young adults and has been proposed to fill knowledge gaps and advance high-quality, more equitable care. As a first step, this study analyzed the quality of current fertility preservation resources online and identified opportunities for improvement.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic analysis of 500 websites to assess the quality, readability, and desirability of website features, and the inclusion of clinically relevant topics.

RESULTS

The majority of the 68 eligible websites were low quality, written at college reading levels, and included few features that younger patients find desirable. Websites mentioned more common fertility preservation treatments than promising experimental treatments, and could be improved with cost information, socioemotional impacts, and other equity-related fertility topics.

CONCLUSIONS

Currently, the majority of fertility preservation websites are about, but not for, adolescent and young adult patients. High-quality educational websites are needed that address outcomes that matter to teens and young adults, with a priority on solutions that prioritize equity.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Adolescent and young adult survivors have limited access to high-quality fertility preservation websites that are designed for their needs. There is a need for the development of fertility preservation websites that are clinically comprehensive, written at appropriate reading levels, inclusive, and desirable. We include specific recommendations that future researchers can use to develop websites that could better address AYA populations and improve the fertility preservation decision making process.

Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions

BACKGROUND

Patient decision aids are interventions designed to support people making health decisions. At a minimum, patient decision aids make the decision explicit, provide evidence-based information about the options and associated benefits/harms, and help clarify personal values for features of options. This is an update of a Cochrane review that was first published in 2003 and last updated in 2017.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of patient decision aids in adults considering treatment or screening decisions using an integrated knowledge translation approach.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted the updated search for the period of 2015 (last search date) to March 2022 in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, EBSCO, and grey literature. The cumulative search covers database origins to March 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included published randomized controlled trials comparing patient decision aids to usual care. Usual care was defined as general information, risk assessment, clinical practice guideline summaries for health consumers, placebo intervention (e.g. information on another topic), or no intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened citations for inclusion, extracted intervention and outcome data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Primary outcomes, based on the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS), were attributes related to the choice made (informed values-based choice congruence) and the decision-making process, such as knowledge, accurate risk perceptions, feeling informed, clear values, participation in decision-making, and adverse events. Secondary outcomes were choice, confidence in decision-making, adherence to the chosen option, preference-linked health outcomes, and impact on the healthcare system (e.g. consultation length). We pooled results using mean differences (MDs) and risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), applying a random-effects model. We conducted a subgroup analysis of 105 studies that were included in the previous review version compared to those published since that update (n = 104 studies). We used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

This update added 104 new studies for a total of 209 studies involving 107,698 participants. The patient decision aids focused on 71 different decisions. The most common decisions were about cardiovascular treatments (n = 22 studies), cancer screening (n = 17 studies colorectal, 15 prostate, 12 breast), cancer treatments (e.g. 15 breast, 11 prostate), mental health treatments (n = 10 studies), and joint replacement surgery (n = 9 studies). When assessing risk of bias in the included studies, we rated two items as mostly unclear (selective reporting: 100 studies; blinding of participants/personnel: 161 studies), due to inadequate reporting. Of the 209 included studies, 34 had at least one item rated as high risk of bias. There was moderate-certainty evidence that patient decision aids probably increase the congruence between informed values and care choices compared to usual care (RR 1.75, 95% CI 1.44 to 2.13; 21 studies, 9377 participants). Regarding attributes related to the decision-making process and compared to usual care, there was high-certainty evidence that patient decision aids result in improved participants' knowledge (MD 11.90/100, 95% CI 10.60 to 13.19; 107 studies, 25,492 participants), accuracy of risk perceptions (RR 1.94, 95% CI 1.61 to 2.34; 25 studies, 7796 participants), and decreased decisional conflict related to feeling uninformed (MD -10.02, 95% CI -12.31 to -7.74; 58 studies, 12,104 participants), indecision about personal values (MD -7.86, 95% CI -9.69 to -6.02; 55 studies, 11,880 participants), and proportion of people who were passive in decision-making (clinician-controlled) (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.88; 21 studies, 4348 participants). For adverse outcomes, there was high-certainty evidence that there was no difference in decision regret between the patient decision aid and usual care groups (MD -1.23, 95% CI -3.05 to 0.59; 22 studies, 3707 participants). Of note, there was no difference in the length of consultation when patient decision aids were used in preparation for the consultation (MD -2.97 minutes, 95% CI -7.84 to 1.90; 5 studies, 420 participants). When patient decision aids were used during the consultation with the clinician, the length of consultation was 1.5 minutes longer (MD 1.50 minutes, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.20; 8 studies, 2702 participants). We found the same direction of effect when we compared results for patient decision aid studies reported in the previous update compared to studies conducted since 2015.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared to usual care, across a wide variety of decisions, patient decision aids probably helped more adults reach informed values-congruent choices. They led to large increases in knowledge, accurate risk perceptions, and an active role in decision-making. Our updated review also found that patient decision aids increased patients' feeling informed and clear about their personal values. There was no difference in decision regret between people using decision aids versus those receiving usual care. Further studies are needed to assess the impact of patient decision aids on adherence and downstream effects on cost and resource use.

Effect of Behavioral Interventions on the Uptake of Colonoscopy for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Screening decreases colorectal cancer incidence and mortality, but uptake in the United States remains suboptimal. Prior studies have investigated the effect of various interventions on overall colorectal cancer screening and stool-based testing, but the effect on colonoscopy-the predominant screening test in the United States-has not been fully examined. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effect of behavioral interventions on screening colonoscopy uptake.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases through January 2022 for controlled trials that assessed the effect of behavioral interventions on screening colonoscopy uptake. All titles, abstracts, and articles were screened by at least 2 independent reviewers. Odds ratios were extracted from the original article or calculated from the raw data. The primary outcome was the relative increase in screening colonoscopy completion with any behavioral intervention. We performed random-effects meta-analysis, with subgroup analysis by type of intervention.

RESULTS

A total of 25 studies with 30 behavioral interventions were analyzed. The most common interventions were patient navigation (n = 11) and multicomponent interventions (n = 6). Overall, behavioral interventions increased colonoscopy completion by 54% compared with controls (odds ratio [OR] 1.54, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.26-1.88). Patient navigation (OR 1.78, 95% CI 1.35-2.34) and multicomponent interventions (OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.17-2.89) had the strongest effect on colonoscopy completion among interventions examined in multiple studies. Significant heterogeneity was observed both overall and by intervention type. There was no evidence of publication bias.

DISCUSSION

Behavioral interventions increase screening colonoscopy completion and should be adopted in clinical practice. In particular, patient navigation and multicomponent interventions are the best-studied and most effective interventions.

Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Adults in Zuni Pueblo: Factors Associated with FOBT and Colonoscopy Utilization

Although strategies to mitigate barriers to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening have proven successful in some parts of the US, few of these strategies have been studied in rural, American Indian communities that may exhibit unique culturally driven attitudes toward and knowledge of colorectal cancer and experience increased barriers to healthcare access. In this study, we describe the results of a survey among CRC screen-eligible members of Zuni Pueblo (N = 218) on an array of questions regarding CRC screening behaviors, knowledge, satisfaction with and access to healthcare services, social support for CRC screening, perceptions toward FOBT, and preference for evidence-based interventions or strategies for improving CRC screening rates. Results from the multivariable model suggest age, having a regular healthcare provider, and harboring fewer negative perceptions toward FOBT are key drivers of ever completing CRC screening. Respondents reported strong support for Community Guide-recommended interventions and strategies for increasing CRC screening for nearly all proposed interventions. Results confirm the need for multilevel, multicomponent interventions, with a particular focus on improving Zuni Pueblo community members' access to a regular source of care, improving knowledge of CRC risk factor, and addressing negative perceptions toward CRC screening. These results provide critical, community-specific insight into better understanding the drivers of low guideline-adherent screening rates and inform local healthcare providers and community leaders of context-specific strategies to improve CRC screening in Zuni Pueblo.

Mixed-Method Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Shared Decision-Making Tools for Cancer Screening

This review aimed to synthesize evidence on the effectiveness of shared decision-making (SDM) tools for cancer screening and explored the preferences of vulnerable people and clinicians regarding the specific characteristics of the SDM tools. A mixed-method convergent segregated approach was employed, which involved an independent synthesis of quantitative and qualitative data. Articles were systematically selected and screened, resulting in the inclusion and critical appraisal of 55 studies. Results from the meta-analysis revealed that SDM tools were more effective for improving knowledge, reducing decisional conflict, and increasing screening intentions among vulnerable populations compared to non-vulnerable populations. Subgroup analyses showed minimal heterogeneity for decisional conflict outcomes measured over a six-month period. Insights from the qualitative findings revealed the complexities of clinicians' and vulnerable populations' preferences for an SDM tool in cancer screening. Vulnerable populations highly preferred SDM tools with relevant information, culturally tailored content, and appropriate communication strategies. Clinicians, on the other hand, highly preferred tools that can be easily integrated into their medical systems for efficient use and can effectively guide their practice for cancer screening while considering patients' values. Considering the complexities of patients' and clinicians' preferences in SDM tool characteristics, fostering collaboration between patients and clinicians during the creation of an SDM tool for cancer screening is essential. This collaboration may ensure effective communication about the specific tool characteristics that best support the needs and preferences of both parties.

Systematic review of randomised controlled trials on interventions aimed at promoting colorectal cancer screening amongst ethnic minorities

OBJECTIVES

Significant disparities exist between different ethnic groups when it comes to participation in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programmes. A variety of interventions have been proposed to improve participation rates of ethnic minorities for CRC screening. This systematic review aims to appraise the evidence available from published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and to identify effective interventions aimed at promoting CRC screening amongst underserved ethnic minorities.

DESIGN

We searched EmBASE, Medline, PsychInfo, Scopus and CINAHL for RCTs that analysed interventions to promote CRC screening in all ethnic minorities. CRC screening was measured as documented or self-reported screening rates. The protocol of this study was registered prospectively on PROSPERO with the registration number CRD42020216384.

RESULTS

We identified 42 relevant RCT articles, out of 1805 articles highlighted by the initial search. All except one were conducted in the US. The most frequently studied ethnic groups were African-Americans (33%), East Asians (30%), and Hispanics/Latinos (23%). In total, 7/42 (16%) RCTs had multiple arms. Interventions mainly intended to educate (52%), provide patient navigation services (21%), or provide a combination of these interventions (19%). We demonstrate that combination methods are most effective.

CONCLUSION

Many RCTs, mostly in the US, have trialed interventions aimed to increase CRC screening uptake amongst ethnic minorities to varying success. We conclude that using a combination of methods with patient navigation, education, and cultural tailoring is most effective at increasing CRC screening uptake amongst ethnic minorities. This highlights that multiple factors may hinder CRC screening and finding a one-size-fits-all solution that can be reliably implemented among different cultures and countries may be complex.

Preliminary Testing of A Web-Based Lung Cancer Screening Decision Coaching Toolfor Older Chinese American Smokers and Their Providers

OBJECTIVES

To examine the acceptability of a culturally targeted lung cancer screening decision aid developed for older Chinese Americans with a smoking history and primary care providers serving this patient population.

METHODS

Study participants reviewed a web-based decision aid (DA) for lung cancer screening named "Lung Decisions Coaching Tool (LDC-T)." Participants completed a baseline survey and were invited to join an interview. During the interview, participants engaged with the Lung Decisions Coaching Tool and then completed standardized measures of acceptability, usability, and satisfaction.

RESULTS

Chinese American smokers (N =22) and Chinese American physicians (N=10) rated the acceptability and usability of a patient version and provider versions of the LDC-T, respectively. Patient version demonstrated high levels of acceptability, usability and satisfaction. Most participants rated the information provided as good or excellent, the amount of tool information was just right, and they thought the tool would be useful for making a screening decision. The tool was well received by participants for ease of use and well-integrated functions. Furthermore, participants indicated they would like to use the tool to help prepare for lung cancer screening shared decision-making with their provider. Similar results were found for the provider version of the LDC-T.

CONCLUSIONS

Lung cancer screening represents an evidence-based approach to reducing lung cancer morbidity and mortality among chronic high-frequency smokers. Study results suggest the acceptability of a culturally targeted lung cancer screening decision aid for Chinese American smokers and providers. Additional research is needed to determine the effectiveness of the DA in increasing appropriate levels of screening in this underserved population.

Websites about, not for, adolescents? A systematic analysis of online fertility preservation information for adolescent and young adult cancer patients

Purpose Fertility preservation is an increasingly important topic in adolescent and young adult cancer survivorship, yet treatments remain under-utilized, possibly due to lack of awareness and understanding. The internet is widely used by adolescents and young adults and has been proposed to fill knowledge gaps and advance high-quality, more equitable care. As a first step, this study analyzed the quality of current fertility preservation resources online and identified opportunities for improvement. Methods We conducted a systematic analysis of 500 websites to assess the quality, readability, and desirability of website features, and the inclusion of clinically relevant topics. Results The majority of the 68 eligible websites were low quality, written at college reading levels, and included few features that younger patients find desirable. Websites mentioned more common fertility preservation treatments than promising experimental treatments, and could be improved with cost information, socioemotional impacts, and other equity-related fertility topics. Conclusions Currently, the majority of fertility preservation websites are about, but not for, adolescent and young adult patients. High-quality educational websites are needed that address outcomes that matter to teens and young adults, with a priority on solutions that prioritize equity. Implications for Cancer Survivors: Adolescent and young adult survivors have limited access to high-quality fertility preservation websites that are designed for their needs. There is a need for the development of fertility preservation websites that are clinically comprehensive, written at appropriate reading levels, inclusive, and desirable. We include specific recommendations that future researchers can use to develop websites that could better address AYA populations and improve the fertility preservation decision making process.

Perceptions of Conflicting Breast Cancer Screening Recommendations Among Racially/Ethnically Diverse Women: a Multimethod Study

BACKGROUND

Conflicting breast cancer screening recommendations have the potential to diminish informed decision making about screening.

OBJECTIVE

We examined the knowledge, attitudes, and intentions related to divergent recommendations for breast cancer screening among racially/ethnically diverse women.

DESIGN

We used a multimethod study design employing focus groups and questionnaires. Focus groups included: (1) two 10-min presentations on the national screening recommendations and the potential benefits and harms of screening and (2) an interactive discussion. Data were collected: 8/3/2017 to 11/19/2019. Analysis occurred from 1/21/2019 to 7/24/2020.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants were (1) women 40-75 years; (2) English or Spanish speaking; (3)self-identified as Latina, Black, or non-Latina White; and (4) no known increased risk for breast cancer.

MAIN MEASURES

Main outcomes were participants' knowledge and perceptions of benefits and harms of screening mammography and their screening intentions. Focus groups were transcribed and analyzed using a qualitative descriptive approach. Quantitative data were summarized using descriptive statistics.

KEY RESULTS

One hundred thirty-four women (n=52, 40-49 years; n=82, 50-75 years) participated in 28 focus groups. Participants were Latina (n=44); Black (n=51); and non-Latina White (n=39). Approximately one-quarter (n=32) had limited health literacy and almost one-fifth (n=23) had limited numeracy. In the context of differing national screening recommendations, participants questioned the motives of the recommendation-making agencies, including the role of costs and how costs were considered when making screening recommendations. Participants expressed concern that they were not represented (e.g., race/ethnicity) in the data informing the recommendations. Immediately following the focus groups, most participants expressed intention to screen within the upcoming year (pre n=100 vs. post n=107).

CONCLUSIONS

Divergent breast cancer screening recommendations may lead to mistrust and paradoxically reinforce high overall enthusiasm for screening.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Patient Decision Aids for Socially Disadvantaged Populations: Update from the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS)

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of patient decision aids (PtDAs) and other shared decision-making (SDM) interventions for socially disadvantaged populations has not been well studied.

PURPOSE

To assess whether PtDAs and other SDM interventions improve outcomes or decrease health inequalities among socially disadvantaged populations and determine the critical features of successful interventions.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane, PsycINFO, and Web of Science from inception to October 2019. Cochrane systematic reviews on PtDAs.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials of PtDAs and SDM interventions that included socially disadvantaged populations.

DATA EXTRACTION

Independent double data extraction using a standardized form and the Template for Intervention Description and Replication checklist.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Twenty-five PtDA and 13 other SDM intervention trials met our inclusion criteria. Compared with usual care, PtDAs improved knowledge (mean difference = 13.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] 9.01, 18.82 [I2 = 96%]) and patient-clinician communication (relative risk = 1.62, 95% CI 1.42, 1.84 [I2 = 0%]). PtDAs reduced decisional conflict (mean difference = -9.59; 95% CI -18.94, -0.24 [I2 = 84%]) and the proportion undecided (relative risk = 0.39; 95% CI 0.28, 0.53 [I2 = 75%]). PtDAs did not affect anxiety (standardized mean difference = 0.02, 95% CI -0.22, 0.26 [I2 = 70%]). Only 1 trial looked at clinical outcomes (hemoglobin A1C). Five of the 12 PtDA studies that compared outcomes by disadvantaged standing found that outcomes improved more for socially disadvantaged participants. No evidence indicated which intervention characteristics were most effective. Results were similar for SDM intervention trials.

LIMITATIONS

Sixteen PtDA studies had an overall unclear risk of bias. Heterogeneity was high for most outcomes. Most studies only had short-term follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

PtDAs led to better outcomes among socially disadvantaged populations but did not reduce health inequalities. We could not determine which intervention features were most effective.[Box: see text].

Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Screening Promotion Using E-Media Decision Aids: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Colorectal cancer (CRC)-screening reduces mortality, yet remains underutilized. The use of electronic media (e-media) decision aids improves saliency and fosters informed decision-making. This systematic review aimed to determine the effectiveness of CRC-screening promotion, using e-media decision aids in primary healthcare (PHC) settings. Three databases (MEDLINE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library) were searched for eligible studies. Studies that evaluated e-media decision aids compared to usual care or other conditions were selected. Quality was assessed by using Cochrane tools. Their effectiveness was measured by CRC-screening completion rates, and meta-analysis was conducted to calculate the pooled estimates. Ten studies involving 9393 patients were included in this review. Follow-up durations spanned 3–24 months. The two types of decision-aid interventions used were videos and interactive multimedia programs, with durations of 6–15 min. Data from nine feasible studies with low or some risk of bias were synthesized for meta-analysis. A random-effects model revealed that CRC-screening promotion using e-media decision aids were almost twice as likely to have screening completion than their comparisons (OR 1.62, 95% CI: 1.03–2.62, p < 0.05). CRC-screening promotion through e-media has great potential for increasing screening participation in PHC settings. Thus, its development should be prioritized, and it should be integrated into existing programs.

Addressing Health Literacy in Patient Decision Aids: An Update from the International Patient Decision Aid Standards

BACKGROUND

There is increasing recognition of the importance of addressing health literacy in patient decision aid (PtDA) development.

PURPOSE

An updated review as part of IPDAS 2.0 examined the extent to which PtDAs are designed to meet the needs of people with low health literacy/socially-disadvantaged populations.

DATA SOURCES

Reference lists of Cochrane reviews of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of PtDAs (2014, 2017, and upcoming 2021 versions).

STUDY SELECTION

RCTs that assessed the impact of PtDAs on low health literacy or other socially-disadvantaged groups (i.e., ≥50% participants from socially-disadvantaged groups and/or subgroup analysis in socially-disadvantaged group/s).

DATA EXTRACTION

Two researchers independently extracted data into a standardized form including PtDA development and evaluation details. We searched online repositories and emailed authors to access PtDAs to verify grade reading level, understandability, and actionability.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Twenty-five of 213 RCTs met the inclusion criteria, illustrating that only 12% of studies addressed the needs of low health literacy or other socially-disadvantaged groups. Grade reading level was calculated in 8 of 25 studies (33%), which is recommended in previous IPDAS guidelines. We accessed and independently assessed 11 PtDAs. None were written at sixth-grade level or below. Ten PtDAs met the recommended threshold for understandability, but only 5 met the recommended threshold for actionability. We also conducted a post hoc subgroup meta-analysis and found that knowledge improvements after receiving a PtDA were greater in studies that reported using strategies to reduce cognitive demand in PtDA development compared with studies that did not (χ² = 14.11, P = 0.0002, I² = 92.9%).

LIMITATIONS

We were unable to access 13 of 24 PtDAs. Conclusions. Greater attention to health literacy and socially-disadvantaged populations is needed in the field of PtDAs to ensure equity in decision support.

Reactance to Social Authority in Entertainment-Education Media: Protocol for a Web-Based Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Entertainment-education media can be an effective strategy for influencing health behaviors. To improve entertainment-education effectiveness, we seek to investigate whether the social authority of a person delivering a health message arouses the motivation to reject that message—a phenomenon known as reactance.

Objective

In this study, using a short animated video, we aim to measure reactance to a sugar reduction message narrated by a child (low social authority), the child’s mother (equivalent social authority to the target audience), and a family physician (high social authority). The aims of the study are to determine the effect of the narrator’s perceived social authority on reactance to the sugar reduction message, establish the effectiveness of the video in improving behavioral intent to reduce the intake of added sugars, and quantify participants’ interest in watching the entertainment-education intervention video.

Methods

This is a parallel group, randomized controlled trial comparing an intervention video narrated by a low, equivalent, or high social authority against a content placebo video and a placebo video. Using a web-based recruitment platform, we plan to enroll 4000 participants aged between 18 and 59 years who speak English and reside in the United Kingdom. The primary end points will include measures of the antecedents to reactance (proneness to reactance and threat level of the message), its components (anger and negative cognition), and attitudinal and behavioral intent toward sugar intake. We will measure behavioral intent using list experiments. Participants randomized to the placebo videos will be given a choice to watch one of the sugar-intervention videos at the end of the study to assess participant engagement with the entertainment-education video.

Results

The study was approved by the ethics committee of Heidelberg University on March 18, 2020 (S-088/2020). Participant recruitment and data collection were completed in December 2020. The data analysis was completed in April 2021, and the final results are planned to be published by August 2021.

Conclusions

In this trial, we will use several randomization procedures, list experimentation methods, and new web-based technologies to investigate the effect of perceived social authority on reactance to a message about reducing sugar intake. Our results will inform the design of future entertainment-education videos for public health promotion needs.

Trial Registration

German Clinical Trials Registry DRKS00022340: https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00022340.

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/25343

Health Literacy Interventions in Cancer: a Systematic Review

Approximately one-third of adults in the United States (U.S.) have limited health literacy. Those with limited health literacy often have difficultly navigating the health care environment, including navigating care across the cancer continuum (e.g., prevention, screening, diagnosis, treatment). Evidence-based interventions to assist adults with limited health literacy improve health outcomes; however, little is known about health literacy interventions in the context of cancer and their impact on cancer-specific health outcomes. The purpose of this review was to identify and characterize the literature on health literacy interventions across the cancer care continuum. Specifically, our aim was to review the strength of evidence, outcomes assessed, and intervention modalities within the existing literature reporting health literacy interventions in cancer. Our search yielded 1036 records (prevention/screening n = 174; diagnosis/treatment n = 862). Following deduplication and review for inclusion criteria, we analyzed 87 records of intervention studies reporting health literacy outcomes, including 45 pilot studies (prevention/screening n = 24; diagnosis/treatment n = 21) and 42 randomized controlled trials or quasi-experimental trials (prevention/screening n = 31; diagnosis/treatment n = 11). This literature included 36 unique interventions (prevention/screening n = 28; diagnosis/treatment n = 8), mostly in the formative stages of intervention development, with few assessments of evidence-based interventions. These gaps in the literature necessitate further research in the development and implementation of evidence-based health literacy interventions to improve cancer outcomes.

A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Two Self-Administered Educational Strategies for Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy of self-administered patient educational tools in improving knowledge and behaviors for the management of knee osteoarthritis.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized clinical trial in patients with knee osteoarthritis to assess the efficacy of providing a video for entertainment education, in combination with two booklets, compared with providing the booklets alone. We evaluated changes in scores on a patient knowledge questionnaire, the Decisional Conflict Scale, the Arthritis Self-Efficacy Scale, and the Effective Consumer Scale between baseline and same day, 3 months, and 6 months post intervention. We used linear regression models to explore associations between demographic characteristics and outcomes, testing for interactions.

RESULTS

Two hundred nineteen participants were randomly assigned to receive the video + booklets (n = 109) or the booklets alone (n = 110). The mean age of participants was 64.6 (±8.3) years. At 6 months, statistically significant improvements were observed in knowledge and decisional conflict scores for both groups, and statistically significant improvements in the behavior to participate in their health care were observed in the video + booklets group. The video + booklets group was more knowledgeable immediately post intervention than the booklet group (mean difference 0.39 [95% confidence interval 0.02-0.76]). No other significant changes in outcomes were observed at 6 months between the two groups. The video + booklets combination was associated with decreased decisional conflict in Spanish speakers and increased self-efficacy in those with less than a high school education.

CONCLUSION

Although both education strategies were associated with improved knowledge and reduced decisional conflict at 6 months, receiving the video + booklets in combination, compared with receiving the booklets alone, proved to be more effective in changing behaviors and appeared to have some advantages for Spanish speakers and those who were less educated.

Interventions for increasing colorectal cancer screening uptake among African-American men: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

African-American men have the lowest 5-year survival rate in the U.S. for colorectal cancer (CRC) of any racial group, which may partly stem from low screening adherence. It is imperative to synthesize the literature evaluating the effectiveness of interventions on CRC screening uptake in this population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, Medline, CINAHL, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched for U.S.-based interventions that: were published after 1998-January 2020; included African-American men; and evaluated CRC screening uptake explicitly. Checklist by Cochrane Collaboration and Joanna Brigg were utilized to assess risk of bias, and meta-regression and sensitivity analyses were employed to identify the most effective interventions.

RESULTS

Our final sample comprised 41 studies with 2 focused exclusively on African-American men. The most frequently adopted interventions were educational materials (39%), stool-based screening kits (14%), and patient navigation (11%). Most randomized controlled trials failed to provide details about the blinding of the participant recruitment method, allocation concealment method, and/or the outcome assessment. Due to high heterogeneity, meta-analysis was conducted among 17 eligible studies. Interventions utilizing stool-based kits or patient navigation were most effective at increasing CRC screening completion, with odds ratios of 9.60 (95% CI 2.89-31.82, p = 0.0002) and 2.84 (95% CI 1.23-6.49, p = 0.01). No evidence of publication bias was present for this study registered with the International Prospective Registry of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO 2019 CRD42019119510).

CONCLUSIONS

Additional research is warranted to uncover effective, affordable interventions focused on increasing CRC screening completion among African-American men. When designing and implementing future multicomponent interventions, employing 4 or fewer interventions types may reduce bias risk. Since only 5% of the interventions solely focused on African-American men, future theory-driven interventions should consider recruiting samples comprised solely of this population.

Adaptation and Preliminary Evaluation of a Lung Cancer Screening Decision Tool for Older Chinese American Populations

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer is a significant health issue among Chinese Americans. The study purpose was to translate and culturally adapt the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's (AHRQ) lung cancer screening decision tool to the needs of older Chinese American smokers.

METHODS

This study used a mixed methods approach. In the first phase, AHRQ lung cancer screening decision aid was translated from English to Chinese. The second phase consisted of a paper and pencil survey (N = 50) designed to measure knowledge and attitudes regarding lung screening. Finally, focus groups (N = 5, 27 participants) were conducted to obtain input on the translated and culturally adapted AHRQ lung cancer screening DA.

RESULTS

The mean age of participants was 70.4 years (SD = 5.4) and the majority were male (n = 42; 84%). Seventy-four percent of the sample reported being a former smoker and 26% a current smoker. Perceived risk for lung cancer was low (26%) and the majority of participants (70%) were unaware of lung cancer screening. Perceived benefits (e.g., early cancer detection) and barriers of LDCT screening (e.g., costs) were reported by participants. The qualitative findings were largely consistent with the quantitative results. Following the revisions to the translated AHRQ DA, participants reported satisfaction with the readability and information provided.

CONCLUSIONS

Lung cancer screening represents an evidence-based approach for reducing lung cancer morbidity and mortality among chronic high frequency smokers. Culturally targeting evidence-based lung cancer screening decision-aids to the language, cultural and health literacy needs of high risk populations may increase uptake of lung cancer early detection screening.

Scoping Review of Self-Advocacy Education Interventions to Improve Care

Self-advocacy is a client's ability to represent one's interests when managing disease or disability. Self-advocacy may increase one's ability to seek, evaluate, and use information to promote health, yet little is known about the role of occupational therapy in promoting self-advocacy. This scoping review aims to identify interventions within occupational therapists' scope of practice to improve self-advocacy. A literature search was conducted through Academic Search Complete to identify interventions within the scope of occupational therapy that promote self-advocacy. All levels of evidence were included, and articles were reviewed for inclusion by two authors. Included articles were charted for level of evidence, objectives, participants, and results. Fourteen articles met the criteria. Interventions included interactive multimedia interventions, peer-led educational groups, writing interventions, job counseling and advocacy, and disease-specific advocacy programs. Occupational therapists are well-equipped to intervene and promote self-advocacy through workplace modification, utilizing assistive technologies, and facilitating peer-led educational groups.

Rise Up, Get Tested, and Live: an Arts-Based Colorectal Cancer Educational Program in a Faith-Based Setting

Engaging community members in efforts to reduce cancer-related health disparities through community mini-grant programs has been shown to have meaningful impact. A predominantly African-American church in South Carolina was awarded a community mini-grant to increase awareness about colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among disproportionally high-risk African-American communities through culturally appropriate arts-based cancer education. The church's pastor, health and wellness ministry, and drama ministry created a theatrical production called Rise Up, Get Tested, and Live. Over 100 attendees viewed the play. A pre/post-test evaluation design assessed the effectiveness of the production in increasing participants' knowledge about CRC and examined their intentions to be screened. Results showed increased knowledge about CRC, increased awareness and understanding about the importance of CRC screening, and favorable intentions about CRC screening. Findings suggest that arts-based cancer education may be an effective tool for the dissemination of information about CRC screening.

Examining the Durability of Colorectal Cancer Screening Awareness and Health Beliefs Among Medically Underserved Patients: Baseline to 12 months Post-Intervention

The current study examines changes in awareness and health beliefs from baseline to 12 months post-intervention following receipt of one of two colorectal cancer (CRC) educational interventions that aimed to promote CRC screening among a racially and ethnically diverse and medically underserved population. Participants (N = 270) were enrolled in a randomized controlled trial to increase CRC screening and completed both baseline and 12-month follow-up assessments. Participants were aged 50-75, at average CRC risk, not up-to-date with CRC screening guidelines, and receiving care at one of three community-based clinics. Participants were randomized to receive either a targeted, low-literacy intervention informed by the Preventive Health Model [PHM] (photonovella and DVD plus fecal immunochemical test [FIT]) or a non-targeted intervention (standard educational brochure plus FIT). Changes in CRC awareness and health beliefs from baseline to 12 months were examined both within and between intervention groups using Student's t tests. Participants in both intervention conditions demonstrated an increase in CRC awareness, PHM social influence, and trust in the healthcare system (all p's < .0001), with no significant between-group differences. Among those receiving the targeted intervention, there also was an increase in PHM salience (p < .05). Among individuals receiving the non-targeted intervention, there was an increase in PHM response efficacy (p < .01) and PHM self-efficacy (p < .0001). Both CRC screening interventions promoted positive changes in awareness and several health beliefs from baseline to 12 months, suggesting important benefits of CRC education. Regardless of whether education was targeted or non-targeted, providing CRC screening education successfully promoted durable changes in awareness and health beliefs.

Evaluation of Interventions Intended to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening Rates in the United States: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Colorectal cancer screening (CRC) is recommended by all major US medical organizations but remains underused.

OBJECTIVE

To identify interventions associated with increasing CRC screening rates and their effect sizes.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from January 1, 1996, to August 31, 2017. Key search terms included colorectal cancer and screening.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials of US-based interventions in clinical settings designed to improve CRC screening test completion in average-risk adults.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

At least 2 investigators independently extracted data and appraised each study's risk of bias. Where sufficient data were available, random-effects meta-analysis was used to obtain either a pooled risk ratio (RR) or risk difference (RD) for screening completion for each type of intervention.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The main outcome was completion of CRC screening. Examination included interventions to increase completion of (1) initial CRC screening by any recommended modality, (2) colonoscopy after an abnormal initial screening test result, and (3) continued rounds of annual fecal blood tests (FBTs).

RESULTS

The main review included 73 randomized clinical trials comprising 366 766 patients at low or medium risk of bias. Interventions that were associated with increased CRC screening completion rates compared with usual care included FBT outreach (RR, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.81-2.81; RD, 22%; 95% CI, 17%-27%), patient navigation (RR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.64-2.46; RD, 18%; 95% CI, 13%-23%), patient education (RR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.06-1.36; RD, 4%; 95% CI, 1%-6%), patient reminders (RR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.02-1.41; RD, 3%; 95% CI, 0%-5%), clinician interventions of academic detailing (RD, 10%; 95% CI, 3%-17%), and clinician reminders (RD, 13%; 95% CI, 8%-19%). Combinations of interventions (clinician interventions or navigation added to FBT outreach) were associated with greater increases than single components (RR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.09-1.29; RD, 7%; 95% CI, 3%-11%). Repeated mailed FBTs with navigation were associated with increased annual FBT completion (RR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.91-2.29; RD, 39%; 95% CI, 29%-49%). Patient navigation was not associated with colonoscopy completion after an initial abnormal screening test result (RR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.92-1.60; RD, 14%; 95% CI, 0%-29%).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Fecal blood test outreach and patient navigation, particularly in the context of multicomponent interventions, were associated with increased CRC screening rates in US trials. Fecal blood test outreach should be incorporated into population-based screening programs. More research is needed on interventions to increase adherence to continued FBTs, follow-up of abnormal initial screening test results, and cost-effectiveness and other implementation barriers for more intensive interventions, such as navigation.

Colorectal Cancer Screening in Black Men: Recommendations for Best Practices

Screening for colorectal cancer has been demonstrated to reduce colorectal cancer mortality. Blacks have a higher mortality from this malignancy, particularly men, yet screening rates in this population are often found to be lower than in whites. A modest literature demonstrates effective interventions that can increase screening rates in blacks; however, results are not consistent and ongoing work is required. Most work has not addressed specific barriers to screening in black men. Given the lack of studies on black men only, this study evaluated the state of research in the black population using a PubMed search. The authors provide commentary that proposes increased (1) state and local government support for collaborative programs with healthcare organizations, including patient navigation; (2) augmented community-organizing efforts to generate more attention to the need for colorectal cancer screening in the black community, with a focus on black men; and (3) federal research funding to promote investigation into new interventions and evaluation of existing ones. Specific recommendations for black men include lowering the screening age to 45years, increasing access to health care, the use of patient navigators, and improved reporting and monitoring of colorectal cancer screening rates. SUPPLEMENT INFORMATION: This article is part of a supplement entitled African American Men's Health: Research, Practice, and Policy Implications, which is sponsored by the National Institutes of Health.

Eliciting vulnerable patients' preferences regarding colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Patient preferences are important to consider in the decision-making process for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Vulnerable populations, such as racial/ethnic minorities and low-income, veteran, and rural populations, exhibit lower screening uptake. This systematic review summarizes the existing literature on vulnerable patient populations' preferences regarding CRC screening.

METHODS

We searched the CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases for articles published between January 1, 1996 and December 31, 2017. We screened studies for eligibility and systematically abstracted and compared study designs and outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 43 articles met the inclusion criteria, out of 2,106 articles found in our search. These 43 articles were organized by the primary sub-population(s) whose preferences were reported: 27 report on preferences among racial/ethnic minorities, eight among low-income groups, six among veterans, and two among rural populations. The majority of studies (n=34) focused on preferences related to test modality. No single test modality was overwhelmingly supported by all sub-populations, although veterans seemed to prefer colonoscopy. Test attributes such as accuracy, sensitivity, cost, and convenience were also noted as important features. Furthermore, a preference for shared decision-making between vulnerable patients and providers was found.

CONCLUSION

The heterogeneity in study design, populations, and outcomes of the selected studies revealed a wide spectrum of CRC screening preferences within vulnerable populations. More decision aids and discrete choice experiments that focus on vulnerable populations are needed to gain a more nuanced understanding of how vulnerable populations weigh particular features of screening methods. Improved CRC screening rates may be achieved through the alignment of vulnerable populations' preferences with screening program design and provider practices. Collaborative decision-making between providers and vulnerable patients in preventive care decisions may also be important.

Interventions for promoting habitual exercise in people living with and beyond cancer

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review published in the Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 9. Despite good evidence for the health benefits of regular exercise for people living with or beyond cancer, understanding how to promote sustainable exercise behaviour change in sedentary cancer survivors, particularly over the long term, is not as well understood. A large majority of people living with or recovering from cancer do not meet current exercise recommendations. Hence, reviewing the evidence on how to promote and sustain exercise behaviour is important for understanding the most effective strategies to ensure benefit in the patient population and identify research gaps.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of interventions designed to promote exercise behaviour in sedentary people living with and beyond cancer and to address the following secondary questions: Which interventions are most effective in improving aerobic fitness and skeletal muscle strength and endurance? Which interventions are most effective in improving exercise behaviour amongst patients with different cancers? Which interventions are most likely to promote long-term (12 months or longer) exercise behaviour? What frequency of contact with exercise professionals and/or healthcare professionals is associated with increased exercise behaviour? What theoretical basis is most often associated with better behavioural outcomes? What behaviour change techniques (BCTs) are most often associated with increased exercise behaviour? What adverse effects are attributed to different exercise interventions?

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We updated our 2013 Cochrane systematic review by updating the searches of the following electronic databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, AMED, CINAHL, PsycLIT/PsycINFO, SportDiscus and PEDro up to May 2018. We also searched the grey literature, trial registries, wrote to leading experts in the field and searched reference lists of included studies and other related recent systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared an exercise intervention with usual care or 'waiting list' control in sedentary people over the age of 18 with a homogenous primary cancer diagnosis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

In the update, review authors independently screened all titles and abstracts to identify studies that might meet the inclusion criteria, or that could not be safely excluded without assessment of the full text (e.g. when no abstract is available). We extracted data from all eligible papers with at least two members of the author team working independently (RT, LS and RG). We coded BCTs according to the CALO-RE taxonomy. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane's tool for assessing risk of bias. When possible, and if appropriate, we performed a fixed-effect meta-analysis of study outcomes. If statistical heterogeneity was noted, a meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model. For continuous outcomes (e.g. cardiorespiratory fitness), we extracted the final value, the standard deviation (SD) of the outcome of interest and the number of participants assessed at follow-up in each treatment arm, to estimate the standardised mean difference (SMD) between treatment arms. SMD was used, as investigators used heterogeneous methods to assess individual outcomes. If a meta-analysis was not possible or was not appropriate, we narratively synthesised studies. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach with the GRADE profiler.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 23 studies in this review, involving a total of 1372 participants (an addition of 10 studies, 724 participants from the original review); 227 full texts were screened in the update and 377 full texts were screened in the original review leaving 35 publications from a total of 23 unique studies included in the review. We planned to include all cancers, but only studies involving breast, prostate, colorectal and lung cancer met the inclusion criteria. Thirteen studies incorporated a target level of exercise that could meet current recommendations for moderate-intensity aerobic exercise (i.e.150 minutes per week); or resistance exercise (i.e. strength training exercises at least two days per week).Adherence to exercise interventions, which is crucial for understanding treatment dose, is still reported inconsistently. Eight studies reported intervention adherence of 75% or greater to an exercise prescription that met current guidelines. These studies all included a component of supervision: in our analysis of BCTs we designated these studies as 'Tier 1 trials'. Six studies reported intervention adherence of 75% or greater to an aerobic exercise goal that was less than the current guideline recommendations: in our analysis of BCTs we designated these studies as 'Tier 2 trials.' A hierarchy of BCTs was developed for Tier 1 and Tier 2 trials, with programme goal setting, setting of graded tasks and instruction of how to perform behaviour being amongst the most frequent BCTs. Despite the uncertainty surrounding adherence in some of the included studies, interventions resulted in improvements in aerobic exercise tolerance at eight to 12 weeks (SMD 0.54, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.70; 604 participants, 10 studies; low-quality evidence) versus usual care. At six months, aerobic exercise tolerance was also improved (SMD 0.56, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.72; 591 participants; 7 studies; low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Since the last version of this review, none of the new relevant studies have provided additional information to change the conclusions. We have found some improved understanding of how to encourage previously inactive cancer survivors to achieve international physical activity guidelines. Goal setting, setting of graded tasks and instruction of how to perform behaviour, feature in interventions that meet recommendations targets and report adherence of 75% or more. However, long-term follow-up data are still limited, and the majority of studies are in white women with breast cancer. There are still a considerable number of published studies with numerous and varied issues related to high risk of bias and poor reporting standards. Additionally, the meta-analyses were often graded as consisting of low- to very low-certainty evidence. A very small number of serious adverse effects were reported amongst the studies, providing reassurance exercise is safe for this population.

Explanation and elaboration of the Standards for UNiversal reporting of patient Decision Aid Evaluations (SUNDAE) guidelines: examples of reporting SUNDAE items from patient decision aid evaluation literature

This Explanation and Elaboration (E&E) article expands on the 26 items in the Standards for UNiversal reporting of Decision Aid Evaluations guidelines. The E&E provides a rationale for each item and includes examples for how each item has been reported in published papers evaluating patient decision aids. The E&E focuses on items key to reporting studies evaluating patient decision aids and is intended to be illustrative rather than restrictive. Authors and reviewers may wish to use the E&E broadly to inform structuring of patient decision aid evaluation reports, or use it as a reference to obtain details about how to report individual checklist items.

Pilot Study of Personalized Video Visit Summaries for Patients With Cancer

PURPOSE

The treatment of cancer is complex, which can overwhelm patients and lead to poor comprehension and recall of the specifics of the cancer stage, prognosis, and treatment plan. We hypothesized that an oncologist can feasibly record and deliver a custom video summary of the consultation that covers the diagnosis, recommended testing, treatment plan, and follow-up in < 5 minutes. The video summary allows the patient to review and share the most important part of a cancer consultation with family and caregivers.

METHODS

At the conclusion of the office visit, oncologists recorded the most important points of the consultation, including the diagnosis and management plan as a short video summary. Patients were then e-mailed a link to a secure Website to view and share the video. Patients and invited guests were asked to respond to an optional survey of 15 multiple-choice and four open-ended questions after viewing the video online.

RESULTS

Three physicians recorded and sent 58 video visit summaries to patients seen in multidisciplinary GI cancer clinics. Forty-one patients logged into the secure site, and 38 viewed their video. Fourteen patients shared their video and invited a total of 46 visitors, of whom 36 viewed the videos. Twenty-six patients completed the survey, with an average overall video satisfaction score of 9 on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being most positive.

CONCLUSION

Video visit summaries provide a personalized education tool that patients and caregivers find highly useful while navigating complex cancer care. We are exploring the incorporation of video visit summaries into the electronic medical record to enhance patient and caregiver understanding of their specific disease and treatment.

Pathways: patient-centred decision counselling for women at risk of cancer-related infertility: a protocol for a comparative effectiveness cluster randomised trial

INTRODUCTION

National guidelines recommend that all reproductive-age women with cancer be informed of their fertility risks and offered referral to fertility specialists to discuss fertility preservation options. However, reports indicate that only 5% of patients have consultations, and rates of long-term infertility-related distress remain high. Previous studies report several barriers to fertility preservation; however, initial success has been reported using provider education, patient decision aids and navigation support. This protocol will test effects of a multicomponent intervention compared with usual care on women's fertility preservation knowledge and decision-making outcomes.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This cluster-randomised trial will compare the multicomponent intervention (provider education, patient decision aid and navigation support) with usual care (consultation and referral, if requested). One hundred newly diagnosed English-speaking women of reproductive age who are at risk of cancer-related infertility will be recruited from four regional oncology clinics.The Pathways patient decision aid website provides (1) up-to-date evidence and descriptions of fertility preservation and other family-building options, tailored to cancer type; (2) structured guidance to support personalising the information and informed decision-making; and (3) a printable summary to help women prepare for discussions with their oncologist and/or fertility specialist. Four sites will be randomly assigned to intervention or control groups. Participants will be recruited after their oncology consultation and asked to complete online questionnaires at baseline, 1 week and 2 months to assess their demographics, fertility preservation knowledge, and decision-making process and quality. The primary outcome (decisional conflict) will be tested using Fisher's exact test. Secondary outcomes will be assessed using generalised linear mixed models, and sensitivity analyses will be conducted, as appropriate.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center provided approval and ongoing review of this protocol. Results will be presented at relevant scientific meetings and submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03141437; Pre-results.

Using a Patient Decision Aid Video to Assess Current and Former Smokers' Values About the Harms and Benefits of Lung Cancer Screening With Low-Dose Computed Tomography

Background. Recent policy changes require discussing the potential benefits and harms of lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography. This study explored how current and former smokers value potential benefits and harms after watching a patient decision aid, and their screening intentions. Methods. Current or former smokers (quit within 15 years) with no history of lung cancer watched the decision aid and responded to items assessing the value of potential benefits and harms in their decision making, and their screening intentions. Results. After viewing the decision aid, participants (n = 30; mean age 61.5 years, mean 30.4 pack-year history) were well-informed (mean 80.5% correct responses) and rated anticipated regret and finding cancer early as highly important in their decision (medians >9 out of 10), along with moderate but variable concerns about false positives, overdiagnosis, and radiation exposure (medians 7.0, 6.0, and 5.0, respectively). Most participants (90.0% to 96.7%) felt clear about how they personally valued the potential benefits and harms and prepared for decision making (mean 86.7 out of 100, SD = 21.3). After viewing the decision aid, most participants (90%) intended to discuss screening with their doctor. Limitations. The study is limited to current and former smokers enrolled in a tobacco treatment program, and it may not generalize to other patient populations. Conclusions. The majority of current and former smokers were strongly concerned about anticipated regret and finding cancer early, while concerns about radiation exposure, false positives, and overdiagnosis were variable. After viewing the decision aid, current and former smokers reported strong preparedness and intentions to talk with their doctor about lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography.