ArticleJournal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education2020
Development of a Plain Language Decision Support Tool for Cancer Clinical Trials: Blending Health Literacy, Academic Research, and Minority Patient Perspectives.
Article in Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Supporting community translation of lung cancer screening: A web-based decision aid to support informed decision making.Translational behavioral medicine · 2025Trial
- Exploring Racial Disparities in Awareness and Perceptions of Oncology Clinical Trials: Cross-Sectional Analysis of Baseline Data From the mychoice Study.JMIR cancer · 2024Trial
- Feasibility, acceptability, and usability of a patient decision aid for participation in the DAHANCA 35 proton radiotherapy trial: A qualitative study.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- A Formative Evaluation of Interventions to Enhance Clinical Trial Diversity Guided by the Socioecological Model.Cancers · 2025Article
- Understanding Inclusion and Participation of People From Black African Diaspora Communities in Health and Care Research: A Realist Review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Review
- Article
- What are the perspectives of patients with hand and wrist conditions, chronic pain, and patients recovering from stroke on the use of patient and outcome information in everyday care? A Mixed-Methods study.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024Article
- Increasing Racial and Ethnic Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion in Cancer Treatment Trials: Evaluation of an ASCO-Association of Community Cancer Centers Site Self-Assessment.JCO oncology practice · 2023Article
- Physicians' use of plain language during discussions of prostate cancer clinical trials with patients.Patient education and counseling · 2022Article
- Development and pilot test of a physician-focused cancer clinical trials communication training intervention.PEC innovation · 2022Article
- An Accessible Communication System for Population-Based Genetic Testing: Development and Usability Study.JMIR formative research · 2022Article
- Development of a web tool to increase research literacy in underserved populations through public library partnerships.PloS one · 2021Article
- Unpacking Trial Offers and Low Accrual Rates: A Qualitative Analysis of Clinic Visits With Physicians and Patients Potentially Eligible for a Prostate Cancer Clinical Trial.JCO oncology practice · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Despite the promise of clinical trials for improving cancer care, less than 5% of all cancer patients participate. Racial/ethnic minorities continue to be underrepresented in cancer clinical trials (CCTs). To address this gap, we developed a plain language, web-based decision support tool (CHOICES DST) in English and Spanish to support decision-making about CCTs among Blacks and Hispanics. In phase 1 (information collection), we conducted qualitative interviews with 45 cancer patients, completed a thorough literature review, and reviewed results from a telephone survey of 1100 cancer patients. In phase 2 (content generation), we created the first iteration of the CHOICES DST. In phase 3 (usability testing), we gathered user experience and acceptability data from a small sample of cancer survivors (n = 9). The Knowledge, Empowerment, and Values Clarification (KEV) model of decision-making was developed based on data from phase 1. The KEV model and other phase 1 data allowed us to create the CHOICES DST platform. Usability testing of the CHOICES DST showed highly favorable responses from users, satisfaction with content, ease of navigation, and a desire to use the tool. Qualitative results identified addressable points that would benefit from content and navigation-related alterations. The final version of the CHOICES DST was well received and understood by Black and Hispanic participants, and adheres to the mandates for plain language communication. This research provides preliminary data that CHOICES DST holds promise for improving knowledge of CCTs and potentially improving informed decision-making about participation in trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.