Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21565651›Full record

Trial reportAmerican journal of preventive medicine2011

Effectiveness of a web-based colorectal cancer screening patient decision aid: a randomized controlled trial in a mixed-literacy population.

David P Miller, John G Spangler, L Doug Case, David C Goff, Sonal Singh, Michael P Pignone

3 registry-linked trialsOpen access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in American journal of preventive medicine, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 82 papers, 18 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
82citing papers in PubMed, 18 pooled it
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03843957 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

Effectiveness and Implementation of mPATH-CRC: a Mobile Health System for Colorectal Cancer Screening

TypeinterventionalSponsorWake Forest University Health SciencesRan2019 to 2023Enrolled77,145ConditionsColorectal Cancer, Cancer, Rectum Cancer, Colon CancerArmsmPATH-CRC, mPATH-Checkin, "high touch" Implementation strategy, "low touch" Implementation Strategy
NCT05477420 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

A Survey Study and Effect of Web-based Decision Aids on Preferences Shift

TypeinterventionalSponsorChinese University of Hong KongRan2022 to 2024Enrolled148ConditionsDepression, PsychotherapiesArmsDecision Aid
NCT06076421 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Do Evidence-based Fact Boxes Improve Informed Decision-making About COVID-19 and Influenza Vaccination in More and Less Disadvantaged Groups Equally? - Study Protocol for a Multi-center Cluster RCT in Health and Social Care in Germany

TypeinterventionalSponsorHarding Center for Risk LiteracyRan2023 to 2024Enrolled800ConditionsCOVID-19, InfluenzaArmsFact box
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

82 citing papers in PubMed, 18 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 132 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Web-based decision aids for cancer clinical decisions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Addressing Health Literacy in Patient Decision Aids: An Update from the International Patient Decision Aid Standards.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2021
    Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Health Literacy Interventions in Cancer: a Systematic Review.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2021
    Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Use of Decision Aids with Minority Patients: a Systematic Review.Journal of general internal medicine · 2016
    Pooled it
  16. Health literacy and cancer screening: a systematic review.Patient education and counseling · 2014
    Pooled it
  17. Pooled it
  18. Pooled it
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

22 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

David P MillerGeneral Internal Medicine, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Medical Center Boulevard, Winston-Salem, NC 27157, USA. dmiller@wakehealth.edu
John G Spangler
L Doug Case
David C Goff
Sonal Singh
Michael P Pignone
Wake Forest University · USJohns Hopkins Medicine · USUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

Improving Cancer-Related Patient Decision MakingK05CA129166 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI PIGNONE, MICHAEL P · 2008 to 2012
$765k
NCI NIH HHS K05 CA129166
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) screening reduces mortality yet remains underutilized. Low health literacy may contribute to this underutilization by interfering with patients' ability to understand and receive preventive health services. PURPOSE: To determine if a web-based multimedia CRC screening patient decision aid, developed for a mixed-literacy audience, could increase CRC screening.

designRCT. Patients aged 50-74 years and overdue for CRC screening were randomized to the web-based decision aid or a control program seen immediately before a scheduled primary care appointment. SETTING/

participantsA large community-based, university-affiliated internal medicine practice serving a socioeconomically disadvantaged population.

main outcome measuresPatients completed surveys to determine their ability to state a screening test preference and their readiness to receive screening. Charts were abstracted by masked observers to determine if screening tests were ordered and completed.

resultsBetween November 2007 and September 2008, a total of 264 patients enrolled in the study. Data collection was completed in 2009, and data analysis was completed in 2010. A majority of participants (mean age=57.8 years) were female (67%), African-American (74%), had annual household incomes of <$20,000 (76%), and had limited health literacy (56%). When compared to control participants, more decision-aid participants had a CRC screening preference (84% vs 55%, p<0.0001) and an increase in readiness to receive screening (52% vs 20%, p=0.0001). More decision-aid participants had CRC screening tests ordered (30% vs 21%) and completed (19% vs 14%), but no statistically significant differences were seen (AOR=1.6, 95% CI=0.97, 2.8, and AOR=1.7, 95% CI=0.88, 3.2, respectively). Similar results were found across literacy levels.

conclusionsThe web-based decision aid increased patients' ability to form a test preference and their intent to receive screening, regardless of literacy level. Further study should examine ways the decision aid can be combined with additional system changes to increase CRC screening.

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesInternetAgedColorectal NeoplasmsFemaleHealth LiteracyHumansMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPatient PreferencePrimary Health CareSocioeconomic Factors

Identifiers

PMID21565651
PMCPMC3480321
OpenAlexW1546618362

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.