Engagement marketing for social good: Application to the All of Us Research Program

Applying Engagement Marketing And Human-Centered Design to Cocreate a Digital Decision Support Tool for Research Participation with LGBTQIA+ Community Members

We used engagement marketing and human-centered design principles to cocreate a digital decision support tool for research participation with LGBTQIA+ community members to help them make an informed decision about joining the All of Us Research Program. Building on results from the research phase, we conducted eight problem validation and solutioning workshops with 48 LGBTQIA+ community members. Community members validated barriers to engagement with All of Us and brainstormed 47 potential digital solutions. We developed potential solutions into 27 concepts (descriptive text and visual storyboards) and assessed acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility, and engagement in a set of 10 concept testing workshops with 57 community members. We developed one of the highest rated concepts, the "Decide Later Tool," into a prototype and tested it with 45 LGBTQIA+ community members and 14 community advisory group members to assess acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility, usability, and engagement. Prototype testing participants indicated that the tool provides information to help with decision making, provides a clear value or benefit to them, was designed for someone like them, provides the right amount of information, and is easy to use; they also offered constructive feedback to improve it. Across the design and development phases, community members indicated that the process of engaging them demonstrated integrity, competence, dependability, trust, and collaboration; fostered a sense of connection to All of Us; and will enhance future engagement with All of Us. Our next steps are to develop the prototype into a fully functioning web tool and pilot test it in community and health care settings.

Promoting patient engagement in cancer genomics research programs: An environmental scan

Background: A national priority in the United States is to promote patient engagement in cancer genomics research, especially among diverse and understudied populations. Several cancer genomics research programs have emerged to accomplish this priority, yet questions remain about the meaning and methods of patient engagement. This study explored how cancer genomics research programs define engagement and what strategies they use to engage patients across stages in the conduct of research. Methods: An environmental scan was conducted of cancer genomics research programs focused on patient engagement. Research programs were identified and characterized using materials identified from publicly available sources (e.g., websites), a targeted literature review, and interviews with key informants. Descriptive information about the programs and their definitions of engagement, were synthesized using thematic analysis. The engagement strategies were synthesized and mapped to different stages in the conduct of research, including recruitment, consent, data collection, sharing results, and retention. Results: Ten research programs were identified, examples of which include the Cancer Moonshot Biobank, the MyPART Network, NCI-CONNECT, and the Participant Engagement and Cancer Genome Sequencing (PE-CGS) Network. All programs aimed to include understudied or underrepresented populations. Based on publicly available information, four programs explicitly defined engagement. These definitions similarly characterized engagement as being interpersonal, reciprocal, and continuous. Five general strategies of engagement were identified across the programs: 1) digital (such as websites) and 2) non-digital communications (such as radio broadcasts, or printed brochures); 3) partnering with community organizations; 4) providing incentives; and 5) affiliating with non-academic medical centers. Digital communications were the only strategy used across all stages of the conduct of research. Programs tailored these strategies to their study goals, including overcoming barriers to research participation among diverse populations. Conclusion: Programs studying cancer genomics are deeply committed to increasing research participation among diverse populations through patient engagement. Yet, the field needs to reach a consensus on the meaning of patient engagement, develop a taxonomy of patient engagement measures in cancer genomics research, and identify optimal strategies to engage patients in cancer genomics. Addressing these needs could enable patient engagement to fulfill its potential and accelerate the pace of cancer genomic discoveries.