The Genomics ADvISER: development and usability testing of a decision aid for the selection of incidental sequencing results.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Bombard Y
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6018661 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
The Genomics ADvISER: development and usability testing of a decision aid for the selection of incidental sequencing results.
Bombard Yvonne Y Clausen Marc M Mighton Chloe C Carlsson Lindsay L Casalino Selina S Glogowski Emily E Schrader Kasmintan K Evans Michael M Scheer Adena A Baxter Nancy N Hamilton Jada G JG Lerner-Ellis Jordan J Offit Kenneth K Robson Mark M Laupacis Andreas A
European journal of human genetics : EJHG 20180427 7
Guidelines recommend patients be informed of their incidental results (IR) when undergoing genomic sequencing (GS), yet there are limited tools to support patients' decisions about learning IR. The aim of this study is to develop and test the usability of a decision aid (DA) to guide patients' selection of IR, and to describe patients' preferences for learning IR following use of the DA. We developed and evaluated a DA using an iterative, mixed-methods process consisting of (1) prototype develop ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Genome sequencing, a novel genetic diagnostic technology that analyses the billions of base pairs of DNA, promises to optimise healthcare through personalised diagnosis and treatment. However, implementation of genome sequencing faces challenges including the lack of consensus on disclosure of incidental results, gene changes unrelated to the disease under investigation, but of potential clinical significance to the patient and their provider. Current recommendations encourage clinicians to return medically actionable incidental results and stress the importance of education and informed consent. Given the shortage of genetics professionals and genomics expertise among healthcare providers, decision aids (DAs) can help fill a critical gap in the clinical delivery of genome sequencing. We aim to assess the effectiveness of an interactive DA developed for selection of incidental results. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:We will compare the DA in combination with a brief Q&A session with a genetic counsellor to genetic counselling alone in a mixed-methods randomised controlled trial. Patients who received negative standard cancer genetic results for their personal and family history of cancer and are thus eligible for sequencing will be recruited from cancer genetics clinics in Toronto. Our primary outcome is decisional conflict. Secondary outcomes are knowledge, satisfaction, preparation for decision-making, anxiety and length of session with the genetic counsellor. A subset of participants will complete a qualitative interview about preferences for incidental results. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:This study has been approved by research ethics boards of St. Michael's Hospital, Mount Sinai Hospital and Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre. This research poses no significant risk to participants. This study evaluates the effectiveness of a novel patient-centred tool to support clinical delivery of incidental results. Results will be shared through national and international conferences, and at a stakeholder workshop to develop a consensus statement to optimise implementation of the DA in practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT03244202; Pre-results.
| S-EPMC5922516 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo evaluate the effectiveness of the Genomics ADvISER (www.genomicsadviser.com) decision aid (DA) for selection of secondary findings (SF), compared with genetic counseling alone.MethodsA randomized controlled trial (RCT) was conducted to evaluate whether the Genomics ADvISER is superior to genetic counseling when hypothetically selecting SF. Participants were randomized to use the DA followed by discussion with a genetic counselor, or to genetic counseling alone. Surveys were administered at baseline and post-intervention. Primary outcome was decisional conflict. Secondary outcomes were knowledge, preparation for, and satisfaction with decision-making, anxiety, and length of counseling session.ResultsParticipants (n = 133) were predominantly White/European (74%), female (90%), and ≥50 years old (60%). Decisional conflict (mean difference 0.05; P = 0.60), preparation for decision-making (0.17; P = 0.95), satisfaction with decision (-2.18; P = 0.06), anxiety (0.72; P = 0.56), and knowledge of sequencing limitations (0.14; P = 0.70) did not significantly differ between groups. However, intervention participants had significantly higher knowledge of SF (0.39; P < 0.001) and sequencing benefits (0.97; P = 0.01), and significantly shorter counseling time (24.40 minutes less; P < 0.001) CONCLUSIONS: The Genomics ADvISER did not decrease decisional conflict but reduced counseling time and improved knowledge. This decision aid could serve as an educational tool, reducing in-clinic time and potentially health care costs.
| S-EPMC7425118 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo user-test a web-based, interactive Option Grid decision aid 'prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test: yes or no?' to determine its usability, acceptability and feasibility with men of high and low health literacy.DesignA semi-structured interview study.SettingInterviews were conducted at a senior centre, academic hospital or college library in New Hampshire and Vermont.ParticipantsIndividuals over 45 years of age with no history of prostate cancer who voluntarily contacted study authors after viewing local invitations were eligible for inclusion. Twenty interviews were conducted: 10 participants had not completed a college degree, of which eight had low health literacy, and 10 participants had high health literacy.InterventionAn interactive, web-based Option Grid patient decision aid for considering whether or not to have a PSA test.ResultsUsers with lower health literacy levels were able to understand the content in the tool but were not able to navigate the Option Grid independent of assistance. The tool was used independently by men with high health literacy. In terms of acceptability, the flow of questions and answers embedded in the tool did not seem intuitive to some users who preferred seeing more risk information related to age and family history. Users envisioned that the tool could be feasibly implemented in clinical workflows.ConclusionMen in our sample with limited health literacy had difficulty navigating the Option Grid, thus suggesting that the tool was not appropriately designed to be usable by all audiences. The information provided in the tool is acceptable, but users preferred to view personalised risk information. Some participants could envision using this tool prior to an encounter in order to facilitate a better dialogue with their clinician.Ethics approvalThe study received ethical approval from the Dartmouth College Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects (STUDY00030116).
| S-EPMC6538002 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMultiple sclerosis (MS) patients often struggle with treatment decisions, in part due to the increasing number of approved disease modifying therapies, each with different characteristics, and also since physicians can struggle to identify which of these characteristics matter most to each individual patient. Decision uncertainty can contribute to late treatment initiation and treatment non-adherence-causes of 'undertreatment' in MS. An interactive online patient decision aid that informs patients of their options, considers their individual preferences and goals, and facilitates conversations with their physicians, could improve how patients with relapsing forms of MS make evidence-based treatment decisions.ObjectiveTo develop and evaluate a prototype patient decision aid (PtDA) for first-line disease modifying therapies for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis.MethodsInformed by previous studies and International Patient Decision Aid Standards guidelines, a prototype PtDA was developed for patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis considering first line treatment. Patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis were recruited from the University of British Columbia's Multiple Sclerosis Clinic to participate in either an online survey or a focus group. Online survey participants completed the PtDA, followed by measures of acceptability, usability, and preparedness for decision-making, and provided general feedback. Focus group participants assessed usability of the revised PtDA. The analysis of qualitative and quantitative data led to improvements of the PtDA prototype.ResultsThe prototype PtDA received high ratings for acceptability and usability, and after its use, participants reported high-levels of preparedness for decision-making. Analysis of all qualitative data identified three key themes: the need for credible information; the usefulness of the PtDA; and the importance of normalizing and sharing experiences. Nine content areas were identified for revision. Overall, participants found the PtDA to be a valuable tool for facilitating treatment decisions.ConclusionsThis mixed methods study has led to the development of a PtDA that can support patients with RRMS as they make treatment decisions. Future studies will assess the feasibility of implementation and the impact of the PtDA on both the timely treatment initiation and longer-term adherence.
| S-EPMC6642472 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo describe the development of a web-based, patient-facing decision aid to support patients and research participants to make an informed, values-based decision about whether to receive additional results from genomic sequencing.MethodsWe developed the decision aid following the multi-step process described in the International Patient Decision Aids Standards. This utilized literature review, focus groups, and alpha testing with research participants undergoing clinical genomic sequencing.ResultsThe decision aid, the Optional Results Choice Aid (ORCA), includes a seven-question "values clarification exercise," illustrative patient quotes, and summative guidance for the user. The decision aid was found to be highly readable, acceptable and relevant in alpha testing.ConclusionWe developed a decision aid to support informed, values-based decision making for patients and research participants considering whether to receive additional results from genomic sequencing. ORCA is being implemented in the NHGRI-funded Cancer Health Assessment Reaching Many (CHARM) study, where we are measuring informed values-choice congruence.Practice implicationsORCA was designed to support patients and research participants to make an informed, values-based decision about whether to receive additional results from genomic sequencing.
| S-EPMC8099937 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWeb-based decision aids are increasingly important in medical research and clinical care. However, few have been studied in an intensive care unit setting. The objectives of this study were to develop a Web-based decision aid for family members of patients receiving prolonged mechanical ventilation and to evaluate its usability and acceptability.MethodsUsing an iterative process involving 48 critical illness survivors, family surrogate decision makers, and intensivists, we developed a Web-based decision aid addressing goals of care preferences for surrogate decision makers of patients with prolonged mechanical ventilation that could be either administered by study staff or completed independently by family members (Development Phase). After piloting the decision aid among 13 surrogate decision makers and seven intensivists, we assessed the decision aid's usability in the Evaluation Phase among a cohort of 30 surrogate decision makers using the Systems Usability Scale (SUS). Acceptability was assessed using measures of satisfaction and preference for electronic Collaborative Decision Support (eCODES) versus the original printed decision aid.ResultsThe final decision aid, termed 'electronic Collaborative Decision Support', provides a framework for shared decision making, elicits relevant values and preferences, incorporates clinical data to personalize prognostic estimates generated from the ProVent prediction model, generates a printable document summarizing the user's interaction with the decision aid, and can digitally archive each user session. Usability was excellent (mean SUS, 80 ± 10) overall, but lower among those 56 years and older (73 ± 7) versus those who were younger (84 ± 9); p = 0.03. A total of 93% of users reported a preference for electronic versus printed versions.ConclusionsThe Web-based decision aid for ICU surrogate decision makers can facilitate highly individualized information sharing with excellent usability and acceptability. Decision aids that employ an electronic format such as eCODES represent a strategy that could enhance patient-clinician collaboration and decision making quality in intensive care.
| S-EPMC4385299 | 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:AimThe purpose of this study was to translate evidence from Cochrane Reviews into a format that can be used to facilitate shared decision making during the consultation, namely patient decision aids.MethodsA systematic development process (a) established a stakeholder committee; (b) developed a prototype according to the International Patient Decision Aid Standards; (c) applied the prototype to a Cochrane Review and used an interview-guided survey to evaluate acceptability/usability; (d) created 12 consult decision aids; and (e) used a Delphi process to reach consensus on considerations for creating a consult decision aid.ResultsThe 1-page prototype includes (a) a title specifying the decision; (b) information on the health condition, options, benefits/harms with probabilities; (c) an explicit values clarification exercise; and (d) questions to screen for decisional conflict. Hyperlinks provide additional information on definitions, probabilities presented graphically, and references. Fourteen Cochrane Consumer Network members and Cochrane Editorial Unit staff participated. Thirteen reported that it would help patient/clinician discussions and were willing to use and/or recommend it. Seven indicated the right amount of information, six not enough, and one too much. Changes to the prototype were more links to definitions, more white space, and details on GRADE evidence ratings. Creating 12 consult decision aids took about 4 h each. We identified ten considerations when selecting Cochrane Reviews for creating consult decision aids.ConclusionsUsing a systematic process, we developed a consult decision aid prototype to be populated with evidence from Cochrane Reviews. It was acceptable and easy to apply. Future studies will evaluate implementation of consult decision aids.
| S-EPMC5107194 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWeb-based tools developed to facilitate a shared decision-making (SDM) process may facilitate the implementation of lung cancer screening (LCS), an evidence-based intervention to improve cancer outcomes. Veterans have specific risk factors and shared experiences that affect the benefits and potential harms of LCS and thus may value a veteran-centric LCS decision tool (LCSDecTool).ObjectiveThis study aims to conduct usability testing of an LCSDecTool designed for veterans receiving care at a Veteran Affairs medical center.MethodsUsability testing of the LCSDecTool was conducted in a prototype version (phase 1) and a high-fidelity version (phase 2). A total of 18 veterans and 8 clinicians participated in phase 1, and 43 veterans participated in phase 2. Quantitative outcomes from the users included the System Usability Scale (SUS) and the End User Computing Satisfaction (EUCS) in phase 1 and the SUS, EUCS, and Patient Engagement scale in phase 2. Qualitative data were obtained from observations of user sessions and brief interviews. The results of phase 1 informed the modifications of the prototype for the high-fidelity version. Phase 2 usability testing took place in the context of a pilot hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation trial.ResultsIn the phase 1 prototype usability testing, the mean SUS score (potential range: 0-100) was 81.90 (SD 9.80), corresponding to an excellent level of usability. The mean EUCS score (potential range: 1-5) was 4.30 (SD 0.71). In the phase 2 high-fidelity usability testing, the mean SUS score was 65.76 (SD 15.23), corresponding to a good level of usability. The mean EUCS score was 3.91 (SD 0.95); and the mean Patient Engagement scale score (potential range 1 [low] to 5 [high]) was 4.62 (SD 0.67). The median time to completion in minutes was 13 (IQR 10-16). A thematic analysis of user statements documented during phase 2 high-fidelity usability testing identified the following themes: a low baseline level of awareness and knowledge about LCS increased after use of the LCSDecTool; users sought more detailed descriptions about the LCS process; the LCSDecTool was generally easy to use, but specific navigation challenges remained; some users noted difficulty understanding medical terms used in the LCSDecTool; and use of the tool evoked veterans' struggles with prior attempts at smoking cessation.ConclusionsOur findings support the development and use of this eHealth technology in the primary care clinical setting as a way to engage veterans, inform them about a new cancer control screening test, and prepare them to participate in an SDM discussion with their provider.
| S-EPMC9034418 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDeciding whether and how to disclose one's autism at work is complex, especially for autistic youth and young adults who are newly entering the labor market and still learning important decision-making and self-determination skills. Autistic youth and young adults may benefit from tools to support disclosure processes at work; however, to our knowledge, no evidence-based, theoretically grounded tool exists specifically for this population. There is also limited guidance on how to pursue the development of such a tool in collaboration with knowledge users.ObjectiveThis study aimed to co-design a prototype of a disclosure decision aid tool with and for Canadian autistic youth and young adults, explore the perceived usability of the prototype (usefulness, satisfaction, and ease of use) and make necessary revisions, and outline the process used to achieve the aforementioned objectives.MethodsTaking a patient-oriented research approach, we engaged 4 autistic youths and young adults as collaborators on this project. Prototype development was guided by co-design principles and strategies, and tool content was informed by a previous needs assessment led by our team, the autistic collaborators' lived experiences, considering intersectionality, research on knowledge translation (KT) tool development, and recommendations from the International Patient Decision Aid Standards. We co-designed a web-based PDF prototype. To assess perceived usability and experiences with the prototype, we conducted 4 participatory design and focus group Zoom (Zoom Video Communications) sessions with 19 Canadian autistic youths and young adults aged 16 to 29 (mean 22.8, SD 4.1) years. We analyzed the data using a combined conventional (inductive) and modified framework method (deductive) analysis to map the data onto usability indicators (usefulness, satisfaction, and ease of use). Grounded in participants' feedback, considering factors of feasibility and availability of resources, and ensuring tool fidelity, we revised the prototype.ResultsWe developed 4 categories pertaining to the perceived usability of and participant experiences with the prototype: past disclosure experiences, prototype information and activities, prototype design and structure, and overall usability. Participant feedback was favorable and indicative of the tool's potential impact and usability. The usability indicator requiring the most attention was ease of use, which was prioritized when revising the prototype. Our findings highlight the importance of engaging knowledge users throughout the entire prototype co-design and testing processes; incorporating co-design strategies and principles; and having content informed by relevant theories, evidence, and knowledge users' experiences.ConclusionsWe outline an innovative co-design process that other researchers, clinicians, and KT practitioners may consider when developing KT tools. We also developed a novel, evidence-based, and theoretically informed web-based disclosure decision aid tool that may help autistic youth and young adults navigate disclosure processes and improve their transitional outcomes as they enter the workforce.
| S-EPMC10176134 | biostudies-literature