ArticleJMIR cancer2023
Exploring the Acceptability of Text Messages to Inform and Support Shared Decision-making for Colorectal Cancer Screening: Online Panel Survey.
Article in JMIR cancer, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Implementation of electronic signposting to interventions that prevent cancer: A realist review.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Article
- Protocol for a pragmatic trial comparing navigator and automated virtual interventions for guaranteeing adherence to fecal immunochemical testing (NAVIGATE-FIT).Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2026Article
- Integrated, Cross-Entity Information on Preventive Measures for Bowel, Breast, and Prostate Cancer: Evaluation Study of the Web Application "Prevent-Take-Up".JMIR cancer · 2025Article
- Previsit Preparation for Shared Decision-Making in Lung Cancer Screening in Primary Care Using a Paper Decision Aid and an Automated Text Messaging Program: Quasi-Experimental Pilot Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Article
- Implementing a Colorectal Cancer Screening Decision Aid via Text Messaging in a Large Massachusetts Health Care System.MDM policy & practiceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhile online portals may be helpful to engage patients in shared decision-making at the time of cancer screening, because of known disparities in patient portal use, sole reliance on portals to support cancer screening decision-making could exacerbate well-known disparities in this health care area. Innovative approaches are needed to engage patients in health care decision-making and to support equitable shared decision-making.
objectiveWe assessed the acceptability of text messages to engage sociodemographically diverse individuals in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening decisions and support shared decision-making in practice.
methodsWe developed a brief text message program offering educational information consisting of components of shared decision-making regarding CRC screening (eg, for whom screening is recommended, screening test options, and pros/cons of options). The program and postprogram survey were offered to members of an online panel. The outcome of interest was program acceptability measured by observed program engagement, participant-reported acceptability, and willingness to use similar programs (behavioral intent). We evaluated acceptability among historically marginalized categories of people defined by income, literacy, and race.
resultsOf the 289 participants, 115 reported having a low income, 146 were Black/African American, and 102 had less than extreme confidence in their health literacy. With one exception, we found equal or greater acceptability, regardless of measure, within each of the marginalized categories of people compared to their counterparts. The exception was that participants reporting an income below US $50,000 were less likely to engage with sufficient content of the program to learn that there was a choice among different CRC screening tests (difference -10.4%, 95% CI -20.1 to -0.8). Of note, Black/African American participants reported being more likely to sign up to receive text messages from their doctor's office compared to white participants (difference 18.7%, 95% CI 7.0-30.3).
conclusionsStudy findings demonstrate general acceptance of text messages to inform and support CRC screening shared decision-making.
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.