Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33888362›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of preventive medicine2021

A Pilot Study Examining the Efficacy of Delivering Colorectal Cancer Screening Messages via Virtual Health Assistants.

Janice L Krieger, Jordan M Neil, Kyle A Duke, Mohan S Zalake, Fatemeh Tavassoli, Melissa J Vilaro, Danyell S Wilson-Howard, Sarah Y Chavez, Eric B Laber, Marie Davidian and 4 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of preventive medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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.

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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

14 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Janice L KriegerSTEM Translational Communication Center, College of Journalism and Communication, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida. Electronic address: janicekrieger@ufl.edu.
Jordan M NeilMassachusetts General Hospital, Harvard University, Boston, Massachusetts.
Kyle A DukeDepartment of Statistical Science, Duke University, Raleigh, North Carolina.
Mohan S ZalakeDepartment of Computer & Information Science & Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
Fatemeh TavassoliDepartment of Computer & Information Science & Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
Melissa J VilaroSTEM Translational Communication Center, College of Journalism and Communication, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
Danyell S Wilson-HowardDepartment of Chemistry, Bethune-Cookman University, Daytona, Florida.
Sarah Y ChavezSTEM Translational Communication Center, College of Journalism and Communication, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
Eric B LaberDepartment of Statistical Science, Duke University, Raleigh, North Carolina.
Marie DavidianDepartment of Statistical Science, Duke University, Raleigh, North Carolina.
Thomas J GeorgeDivision of Hematology & Oncology, Department of Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
François P ModaveDepartment of Health Outcomes & Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
Folakemi T OdedinaDepartment of Pharmacotherapy and Translational Research, College of Pharmacy, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
Benjamin C LokDepartment of Computer & Information Science & Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
University of Florida · USDuke University · USBethune-Cookman University · USMassachusetts General Hospital · US

Funding

Reporting Nutrition Risk Factors via Virtual Humans for Colorectal Cancer Prevention.R01CA207689 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA · PI LOK, BENJAMIN, RAUP-KRIEGER, JANICE LEE · 2017 to 2021
$3.7M
Tailoring Recruitment Communication using Virtual Human Technology to Increase Participation of Older Minority Adults in Clinical TrialsR24AG074867 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA · PI ANTON, STEPHEN D, RAUP-KRIEGER, JANICE LEE · 2021 to 2023
$2.0M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA207689NIA NIH HHS R24 AG074867
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPatients are more likely to complete colorectal cancer screening when recommended by a race-concordant healthcare provider. Leveraging virtual healthcare assistants to deliver tailored screening interventions may promote adherence to colorectal cancer screening guidelines among diverse patient populations. The purpose of this pilot study is to determine the efficacy of the Agent Leveraging Empathy for eXams virtual healthcare assistant intervention to increase patient intentions to talk to their doctor about colorectal cancer screening. It also examines the influence of animation and race concordance on intentions to complete colorectal cancer screening.

methodsWhite and Black adults (N=1,363) aged 50-73 years and not adherent to colorectal cancer screening guidelines were recruited from Qualtrics Panels in 2018 to participate in a 3-arm (animated virtual healthcare assistant, static virtual healthcare assistant, attention control) message design experiment. In 2020, a probit regression model was used to identify the intervention effects.

resultsParticipants assigned to the animated virtual healthcare assistant (p<0.01) reported higher intentions to talk to their doctor about colorectal cancer screening than participants assigned to the other conditions. There was a significant effect of race concordance on colorectal cancer screening intentions but only in the static virtual healthcare assistant condition (p=0.04). Participant race, age, trust in healthcare providers, health literacy, and cancer information overload were also significant predictors of colorectal cancer screening intentions.

conclusionsAnimated virtual healthcare assistants were efficacious compared with the static virtual healthcare assistant and attention control conditions. The influence of race concordance between source and participant was inconsistent across conditions. This warrants additional investigation in future studies given the potential for virtual healthcare assistant‒assisted interventions to promote colorectal cancer screening within guidelines.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerAdultBlack or African AmericanHumansMass ScreeningPilot Projects

Identifiers

PMID33888362
PMCPMC11742246
OpenAlexW3156342286

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.