Informed decision making before prostate-specific antigen screening: Initial results using the American Cancer Society (ACS) Decision Aid (DA) among medically underserved men.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Gokce MI
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5293675 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Informed decision making before prostate-specific antigen screening: Initial results using the American Cancer Society (ACS) Decision Aid (DA) among medically underserved men.
Gökce Mehmet I MI Wang Xuemei X Frost Jacqueline J Roberson Pamela P Volk Robert J RJ Brooks Durado D Canfield Steven E SE Pettaway Curtis A CA
Cancer 20161011 4
<h4>Background</h4>The American Cancer Society (ACS) recommends men have the opportunity to make an informed decision about screening for prostate cancer (PCa). The ACS developed a unique decision aid (ACS-DA) for this purpose. However, to date, studies evaluating the efficacy of the ACS-DA are lacking. The authors evaluated the ACS-DA among a cohort of medically underserved men (MUM).<h4>Methods</h4>A multiethnic cohort of MUM (n = 285) was prospectively included between June 2010 and December ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Participation in the decision-making process and health literacy may both affect health outcomes; data on how these factors are related among diverse groups are limited. This study examined the relationship between health literacy and decision-making preferences in a medically underserved population.We analyzed a sample of 576 primary care patients. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the independent association of health literacy (measured by the Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine-Revised) and patients' decision-making preferences (physician directed or patient involved), controlling for age, race/ethnicity, and gender. We tested whether having a regular doctor modified this association.Adequate health literacy (odds ratio [OR] = 1.7;P= 0.009) was significantly associated with preferring patient-involved decision making, controlling for age, race/ethnicity, and gender. Having a regular doctor did not modify this relationship. Males were significantly less likely to prefer patient-involved decision making (OR = 0.65;P= 0.024).Findings suggest health literacy affects decision-making preferences in medically underserved patients. More research is needed on how factors, such as patient knowledge or confidence, may influence decision-making preferences, particularly for those with limited health literacy.
| S-EPMC5546799 | biostudies-other
Project description:ContextAdvanced cancer patients have unrecognized gaps in their understanding about palliative radiation therapy (PRT).ObjectivesTo build a video decision aid for hospitalized patients with advanced cancer referred for PRT and prospectively test its efficacy in reducing decisional uncertainty, improving knowledge, increasing treatment readiness and readiness for palliative care consultation, and its acceptability among patients.MethodsForty patients with advanced cancer hospitalized at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center watched a video decision aid about PRT and palliative care. Patients' conceptual and logistical knowledge of PRT, decisional uncertainty, treatment readiness, and readiness for palliative care consultation were assessed before and after watching the video with a six-item knowledge survey, the decisional uncertainty subscale of the Decisional Conflict Scale, and Likert instruments to assess readiness to accept radiation treatment and/or palliative care consultation, respectively. A postvideo survey assessed the video's acceptability among patients.ResultsAfter watching the video, decisional uncertainty was reduced (28.3 vs. 21.7; P = 0.02), knowledge of PRT improved (60.4 vs. 88.3; P < 0.001), and PRT readiness increased (2.0 vs. 1.3; P = 0.04). Readiness for palliative care consultation was unchanged (P = 0.58). Patients felt very comfortable (70%) watching the video and would highly recommend it (75%) to others.ConclusionAmong hospitalized patients with advanced cancer, a video decision aid reduced decisional uncertainty, improved knowledge of PRT, increased readiness for PRT, and was well received by patient viewers.
| S-EPMC8132595 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Early in pregnancy women and their partners face the complex decision on whether or not to participate in prenatal testing for fetal chromosomal abnormalities. Several studies show that the majority of pregnant women currently do not make informed decisions regarding prenatal testing. As the range of prenatal tests is expanding due to the development of new techniques such as non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT), autonomous reproductive decision-making is increasingly challenging. In this study, a randomised controlled trial was conducted to evaluate the effect of a web-based multimedia decision aid on decision-making regarding prenatal testing. The decision aid provided both written and audiovisual information on prenatal tests currently available, that is, prenatal screening by first-trimester combined testing, NIPT and invasive diagnostic testing through chorionic villus sampling or amniocentesis. Furthermore, it contained values clarification exercises encouraging pregnant women to reflect on the potential harms and benefits of having prenatal tests performed. The use of the decision aid improved informed decision-making regarding prenatal testing. Of pregnant women allocated to the intervention group (n=130) 82.3% made an informed choice compared with 66.4% of women in the control group (n=131), P=0.004. As the vast majority of pregnant women made decisions consistent with their attitudes towards having prenatal testing performed, this improvement in informed decision-making could be attributed mainly to an increase in decision-relevant knowledge. This study shows that the implementation of a web-based multimedia decision aid directly facilitates the ultimate goal of prenatal testing for fetal chromosomal abnormalities, which is enabling informed autonomous reproductive choice.
| S-EPMC5027684 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCystic fibrosis (CF) is a life-limiting genetic disease that causes chronic lung infections. We developed an internet-based decision aid (DA) to help patients with CF make better informed decisions regarding treatments and advance care planning. We built the DA around two major treatment decisions: whether to have a lung transplant and whether to agree to invasive mechanical ventilation (intubation).ObjectiveThis study aims to conduct usability testing of the InformedChoices CF DA among key stakeholder groups.MethodsWe performed a patient needs assessment using think-aloud usability testing with patients with CF, their surrogates, and CF clinicians. Think-aloud participants provided feedback while navigating the DA, and after viewing, they answered surveys. Transcripts from the think-aloud sessions and survey results were categorized into common, generalizable themes and optimizations for improving content, comprehension, and navigation. We assessed the ease of use of the DA (System Usability Scale) and also assessed the participants' perceptions regarding the overall tone, with an emphasis on emotional reactions to the DA content, level of detail, and usefulness of the information for making decisions about either intubation or lung transplantation, including how well they understood the information and were able to apply it to their own decision-making process. We also assessed the DA's ease of navigation, esthetics, and whether participants were able to complete a series of usability tasks (eg, locating specific information in the DA or using the interactive survival estimates calculator) to ensure that the website was easy to navigate during the clinic-based advance care planning discussions.ResultsA total of 12 participants from 3 sites were enrolled from March 9 to August 30, 2018, for the usability testing: 5 CF clinicians (mean age 48.2, SD 12.0 years), 5 adults with CF, and 2 family and surrogate caregivers of people with CF (mean age of CF adults and family and surrogate caregivers 38.8, SD 10.8 years). Among the 12 participants, the average System Usability Scale score for the DA was 88.33 (excellent). Think-aloud analysis identified 3 themes: functionality, visibility and navigation, and content and usefulness. Areas for improvement included reducing repetition, enhancing comprehension, and changing the flow. Several changes to improve the content and usefulness of the DA were recommended, including adding information about alternatives to childbearing, such as adoption and surrogacy. On the basis of survey responses, we found that the navigation of the site was easy for clinicians, patients, and surrogates who participated in usability testing.ConclusionsUsability testing revealed areas of potential improvement. Testing also yielded positive feedback, suggesting the DA's future success. Integrating changes before implementation should improve the DA's comprehension, navigation, and usefulness and lead to greater adoption.
| S-EPMC8082389 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Abstract The depths of the impact of COVID‐19 on nearly every aspect of our personal and professional lives was becoming painfully clear in May and June of 2020. While institutions of higher education had implemented crisis/emergency plans in the immediate onset of the pandemic, and largely extended those efforts into summer terms, the fall 2020 term loomed large. Institutional researchers were asked for myriad kinds of data and reports, ostensibly to inform executive leaders’ decision‐making regarding how to operate for the fall term. On its face, this fits with the current conceptualization of IR's work largely as decision support. Despite these requests, however, the question remains as to what was really driving decision‐making about the fall. This research examined a random, representative sample of public statements regarding fall operations, often released in the name of a president or chancellor, to determine what factors these leaders espoused publicly as informing their fall plans.
| S-EPMC8652806 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionMaintaining and enhancing vaccine confidence continues to be a challenge. Making an informed decision not only helps to avoid potential future regret but also reduces susceptibility to misinformation. There is an urgent need for interventions that facilitate informed decision-making about vaccines. This paper describes the systematic development of two interventions designed to promote informed decision making and indirectly, acceptance of maternal pertussis vaccination (MPV) in the Netherlands.Materials and methodsThe 6-step Intervention Mapping (IM) protocol was used for the development of an online tailored decision aid and Centering Pregnancy-based Group Antenatal Care (CP) intervention. A needs assessment was done using empirical literature and conducting a survey and focus groups (1), intervention objectives were formulated at the behavior and determinants levels (2), theoretical methods of behavior change were selected and translated into practical applications (3), which were further developed into the two interventions using user-centered design (4). Finally, plans were developed for implementation (5), and evaluation (6) of the interventions.ResultsThe needs assessment showed that pregnant women often based their decision about MPV on information sourced online and conversations with their partners, obstetric care providers, and peers. Responding to these findings, we systematically developed two interactive, theory-based interventions. We created an online tailored decision aid, subjecting it to four iterations of testing among pregnant women, including those with low literacy levels. Participants evaluated prototypes of the intervention positively on relevance and usability. In addition, a CP intervention was developed with midwives.ConclusionUsing IM resulted in the creation of an online decision aid and CP intervention to promote informed decision making regarding MPV. This description of the systematic development of the interventions not only serves to illustrate design rationales, it will also aid the interpretation of the evaluation of the interventions, the development of future interventions promoting informed decision and acceptance of vaccines, and comparisons with other interventions.
| S-EPMC10902124 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Physicians face a challenge in promoting colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) in the face of multiple competing demands. A decision aid (DA) that clarifies patient preferences and improves decision quality could aid shared decision making (SDM) and be effective at increasing CRCS rates. However, exactly how such DA improves SDM is not clear. This 4-year R01 study funded by the National Cancer Institute seeks to provide detailed understanding of how an interactive DA affects patient-physician communication and SDM, and ultimately CRCS adherence.
| 2118961 | ecrin-mdr-crc
Project description:BackgroundHealth insurance enrollment is a difficult financial decision with large health impacts. Challenges such as low health insurance literacy and lack of knowledge about choosing a plan further complicate this decision-making process. Therefore, to support consumers in their choice of a health insurance plan, it is essential to understand how individuals go about making this decision.ObjectiveThis study aims to understand the sources of information used by individuals to support their employer-provided health insurance enrollment decisions. It seeks to describe how individual descriptive factors lead to choosing a particular type of information source.MethodsAn introduction was presented on health insurance plan selection and the sources of information used to support these decisions from the 1980s to the present. Subsequently, an electronic survey of 151 full-time faculty and staff members was conducted. The survey consisted of four sections: demographics, sources of information, health insurance literacy, and technology acceptance. Descriptive statistics were used to show the demographic characteristics of the 126 eligible respondents and to study the response behaviors in the remaining survey sections. Proportion data analysis was performed using the Cochran-Armitage trend test to understand the strength of the association between our variables and the types of sources used by the respondents.ResultsIn terms of demographics, most of the respondents were women (103/126, 81.7%), represented a small household (1-2 persons; 87/126, 69%), and used their insurance 3-12 times a year (52/126, 41.3%). They assessed themselves as having moderate to high health insurance literacy and high acceptance of technology. The most selected and top-ranked sources were Official employer or state websites and Official Human Resources Virtual Benefits Counselor Alex. From our data analysis, we found that the use of official primary sources was constant across age groups and health insurance use groups. Meanwhile, the use of friends or family as a primary source slightly decreased as age and use increased.ConclusionsIn this exploratory study, we identified the main sources of health insurance information among full-time employees from a large state university and found that most of the respondents needed 2-3 sources to gather all the information that they desired. We also studied and identified the relationships between individual factors (such as age, gender, and literacy) and 2 dependent variables on the types of primary sources of information. We encountered several limitations, which will be addressed in future studies.
| S-EPMC8391737 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPublic health professionals are increasingly expected to engage in evidence-informed decision making to inform practice and policy decisions. Evidence-informed decision making involves the use of research evidence along with expertise, existing public health resources, knowledge about community health issues, the local context and community, and the political climate. The National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools has identified a seven step process for evidence-informed decision making. Tools have been developed to support public health professionals as they work through each of these steps. This paper provides an overview of tools used in three Canadian public health departments involved in a study to develop capacity for evidence-informed decision making.MethodsAs part of a knowledge translation and exchange intervention, a Knowledge Broker worked with public health professionals to identify and apply tools for use with each of the steps of evidence-informed decision making. The Knowledge Broker maintained a reflective journal and interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of decision makers and public health professionals. This paper presents qualitative analysis of the perceived usefulness and usability of the tools.ResultsTools were used in the health departments to assist in: question identification and clarification; searching for the best available research evidence; assessing the research evidence for quality through critical appraisal; deciphering the 'actionable message(s)' from the research evidence; tailoring messages to the local context to ensure their relevance and suitability; deciding whether and planning how to implement research evidence in the local context; and evaluating the effectiveness of implementation efforts. Decision makers provided descriptions of how the tools were used within the health departments and made suggestions for improvement. Overall, the tools were perceived as valuable for advancing and sustaining evidence-informed decision making.ConclusionTools are available to support the process of evidence-informed decision making among public health professionals. The usability and usefulness of these tools for advancing and sustaining evidence-informed decision making are discussed, including recommendations for the tools' application in other public health settings beyond this study. Knowledge and awareness of these tools may assist other health professionals in their efforts to implement evidence-informed practice.
| S-EPMC4223550 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCareful patient-clinician shared decision-making about dialysis initiation has been promoted, but few studies have addressed patient perspectives on the extent of information provided and how decisions to start dialysis are made.MethodsNinety-nine maintenance dialysis patients recruited from 15 outpatient dialysis centers in North Carolina completed semistructured interviews on information provision and communication about the initiation of dialysis. These data were examined with content analysis. In addition, informed decision-making (IDM) scores were created by summing patient responses (yes/no) to 10 questions about the decision-making.ResultsThe mean IDM score was 4.4 (of 10; SD = 2.0); 67% scored 5 or lower. Age at the time of decision-making (r = -0.27, P = 0.006), years of education (r = 0.24, P = 0.02) and presence of a warning about progressing to end-stage kidney disease (t = 2.9, P = 0.005) were significantly associated with IDM scores. Nearly 70% said that the risks and burdens of dialysis were not mentioned at all, and only one patient recalled that the doctor offered the option of not starting dialysis. While a majority (67%) said that they felt they had no choice about starting dialysis (because the alternative would be death) or about dialysis modality, only 21.2% said that they had felt rushed to make a decision. About one-third of the patients perceived that the decision to start dialysis and modality was already made by the doctor.ConclusionsA majority of patients felt unprepared and ill-informed about the initiation of dialysis. Improving the extent of IDM about dialysis may optimize patient preparation prior to starting treatment and their perceptions about the decision-making process.
| S-EPMC3811056 | biostudies-literature