Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24097199›Full record

Trial reportCancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology2013

Randomized controlled trial of a sun protection intervention for children of melanoma survivors.

Ellen R Gritz, Mary K Tripp, Susan K Peterson, Alexander V Prokhorov, Sanjay S Shete, Diana L Urbauer, Bryan M Fellman, Jeffrey E Lee, Jeffrey E Gershenwald

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Effects of web-based intervention on risk reduction behaviors in melanoma survivors.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2015
    Trial
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. A Review of the Impact of Sun Safety Interventions in Children.Dermatology practical & conceptual · 2023
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Differences in Sun Protection Behaviors Between Rural and Urban Communities in Texas.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2019
    Article
  17. Development of an Educational Program Integrating Concepts of Genetic Risk and Preventive Strategies for Children with a Family History of Melanoma.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2018
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

9 authors.

Ellen R GritzAuthors' Affiliation: The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Mary K Tripp
Susan K Peterson
Alexander V Prokhorov
Sanjay S Shete
Diana L Urbauer
Bryan M Fellman
Jeffrey E Lee
Jeffrey E Gershenwald

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Scott Kopetz · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016672NCI NIH HHS P30CA016672
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe studied whether a melanoma survivor-centered intervention was more effective than materials available to the general public in increasing children's sun protection.

methodsIn a randomized controlled trial, melanoma survivors (n = 340) who had a child ≤ 12 years received a targeted sun protection intervention (DVD and booklets) or standard education. Primary outcomes were children's sunburns, children's sun protection, and survivors' psychosocial factors at baseline and postintervention (1 and 4 months).

resultsThe intervention increased children's sunscreen reapplication at 1 month (P = 0.002) and use of wide-brimmed hats at 4 months (P = 0.045). There were no effects on other behaviors or sunburns. The intervention improved survivors' hats/clothing self-efficacy at both follow-up assessments (P = 0.026, 0.009). At 4 months, the intervention improved survivors' clothing intentions (P = 0.029), knowledge (P = 0.010), and outcome expectations for hats (P = 0.002) and clothing (P = 0.037). Children's sun protection increased with survivors' intervention use. The intervention was less effective in survivors who were female or who had a family history, older children, or children with higher baseline sun protection scores.

conclusionsA melanoma survivor-centered sun protection intervention can improve some child and survivor outcomes. The intervention may be more effective in survivors who have younger children or less experience with sun protection. Intervention delivery must be enhanced to maximize use. IMPACT: This is the first study to examine a sun protection intervention for children of melanoma survivors. Findings will guide interventions for this important population at increased melanoma risk.

Indexed as

AdultChildFemaleHumansMaleMelanomaSkin NeoplasmsSunburnSunscreening AgentsSurvivorsSunscreening Agents

Identifiers

PMID24097199
PMCPMC3929920

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.