Dataset Information

Investigating informed choice in screening programmes: a mixed methods analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Screening programmes aim to identify individuals at higher risk of developing a disease or condition. While globally, there is agreement that people who attend screening should be fully informed, there is no consensus about how this should be achieved. We conducted a mixed methods study across eight different countries to understand how countries address informed choice across two screening programmes: breast cancer and fetal trisomy anomaly screening.

Methods

Fourteen senior level employees from organisations who produce and deliver decision aids to assist informed choice were interviewed, and their decision aids (n = 15) were evaluated using documentary analysis.

Results

We discovered that attempts to achieve informed choice via decision aids generate two key tensions (i) between improving informed choice and increasing uptake and (ii) between improving informed choice and comprehensibility of the information presented. Comprehensibility is fundamentally at tension with an aim of being fully informed. These tensions emerged in both the interviews and documentary analysis.

Conclusion

We conclude that organisations need to decide whether their overarching aim is ensuring high levels of uptake or maximising informed choice to participate in screening programmes. Consideration must then be given to all levels of development and distribution of information produced to reflect each organisation's aim. The comprehensibility of the DA must also be considered, as this may be reduced when informed choice is prioritised.

SUBMITTER: Tyldesley-Marshall N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9743591 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Investigating informed choice in screening programmes: a mixed methods analysis.

Tyldesley-Marshall Natalie N Grove Amy A Ghosh Iman I Kudrna Laura L Ayorinde Abimbola A Singh Megha M Mehaan Edward E Clarke Aileen A Taylor-Phillips Sian S Al-Khudairy Lena L

BMC public health 20221212 1

<h4>Background</h4>Screening programmes aim to identify individuals at higher risk of developing a disease or condition. While globally, there is agreement that people who attend screening should be fully informed, there is no consensus about how this should be achieved. We conducted a mixed methods study across eight different countries to understand how countries address informed choice across two screening programmes: breast cancer and fetal trisomy anomaly screening.<h4>Methods</h4>Fourteen ...[more]

PMID: 36510247

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundBarriers experienced by patients influence the uptake of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Prior research has quantified how often patients encounter these challenges but has generally not revealed their complex perspective and experience with barriers.PurposeThis mixed-methods study was conducted to understand current perspectives on CRC screening.MethodsA two-part, mixed-methods study was conducted of primary care patients recruited from Virginia Ambulatory Care Outcomes Research Network practices. First, in June-July 2005 a survey was mailed to 660 patients aged 50-75 years posing an open-ended question about "the most important barrier" to CRC screening. Second, beginning in October 2005, seven gender- and largely race-specific focus groups involving 40 patients aged 45-75 years were conducted. Beginning in October 2005, survey verbatim responses were coded and quantitatively analyzed and focus group transcripts were qualitatively analyzed.ResultsResponses to the open-ended survey question, answered by 74% of respondents, identified fear and the bowel preparation as the most important barriers to screening. Only 1.6% of responses cited the absence of physician advice. Focus group participants cited similar issues and other previously reported barriers, but their remarks exposed the intricacies of complex barriers, such as fear, lack of information, time, the role of physicians, and access to care. Participants also cited barriers that have little documentation in the literature, such as low self-worth, "para-sexual" sensitivities, fatalism, negative past experiences with testing, and skepticism about the financial motivation behind screening recommendations.ConclusionsMixed-methods analysis helps to disaggregate the complex nuances that influence patient behavior. In the present study, patients explained the web of influences on knowledge, motivation, and ability to undergo CRC screening, which clinicians and policymakers should consider in designing interventions to increase the level of screening.

Project description:BackgroundInformed consent forms (ICFs) for clinical trials have become increasingly complex, often hindering participant comprehension and engagement due to legal jargon and lengthy content. The recent advances in large language models (LLMs) present an opportunity to streamline the ICF creation process while improving readability, understandability, and actionability.objectivesThis study aims to evaluate the performance of the Mistral 8x22B LLM in generating ICFs with improved readability, understandability, and actionability. Specifically, we evaluate the model's effectiveness in generating ICFs that are readable, understandable, and actionable while maintaining the accuracy and completeness.MethodsWe processed 4 clinical trial protocols from the institutional review board of UMass Chan Medical School using the Mistral 8x22B model to generate key information sections of ICFs. A multidisciplinary team of 8 evaluators, including clinical researchers and health informaticians, assessed the generated ICFs against human-generated counterparts for completeness, accuracy, readability, understandability, and actionability. Readability, Understandability, and Actionability of Key Information indicators, which include 18 binary-scored items, were used to evaluate these aspects, with higher scores indicating greater accessibility, comprehensibility, and actionability of the information. Statistical analysis, including Wilcoxon rank sum tests and intraclass correlation coefficient calculations, was used to compare outputs.ResultsLLM-generated ICFs demonstrated comparable performance to human-generated versions across key sections, with no significant differences in accuracy and completeness (P>.10). The LLM outperformed human-generated ICFs in readability (Readability, Understandability, and Actionability of Key Information score of 76.39% vs 66.67%; Flesch-Kincaid grade level of 7.95 vs 8.38) and understandability (90.63% vs 67.19%; P=.02). The LLM-generated content achieved a perfect score in actionability compared with the human-generated version (100% vs 0%; P<.001). Intraclass correlation coefficient for evaluator consistency was high at 0.83 (95% CI 0.64-1.03), indicating good reliability across assessments.ConclusionsThe Mistral 8x22B LLM showed promising capabilities in enhancing the readability, understandability, and actionability of ICFs without sacrificing accuracy or completeness. LLMs present a scalable, efficient solution for ICF generation, potentially enhancing participant comprehension and consent in clinical trials.

Project description:IntroductionAlthough the sustainability of the health workforce has been identified as essential to achieving health and wider development objectives, challenges with securing and retaining the healthcare workforce persist. In the UK, there are notable shortages across a wide range of National Health Service (NHS) staff groups, with a high staff turnover indicating retention issues in the healthcare workforce. In addition, gaps exist in understanding the root cause of individual organisation's workforce deficiencies and how their practice environment factors interact to impact workforce recruitment and retention.Methods and analysisAn exploratory mixed-methods approach will be conducted to investigate the impact of organisational practice environment factors on healthcare workforce recruitment and retention in two Integrated Care Systems (ICS) in the East of England. We will conduct an online survey of newly qualified and established nurses and allied health professionals using a questionnaire adapted from two validated instruments. Our calculation suggests a sample size of 373 participants, we will aim to surpass this in our recruitment to strengthen the statistical analyses. Multilevel linear regression models will be fitted to evaluate the association between organisational practice environmental factors and staff recruitment and retention. The qualitative interviews will explore the experiences and perspectives of staff and senior leaders to explain the survey results and any significant associations therein. Also, the interviews will explore how to strengthen the partnership between higher education institutions, Health Education England, health and care service providers, NHS nursing and allied health professional staff to enhance recruiting and retaining staff. An exploratory inductive coding and analysis will follow Braun and Clarke's recommendations to generate key themes from transcribed interview data.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval has been obtained through the University of Suffolk Research Ethics Committee (approval number: RETH(S)22/051). Findings from our work will be disseminated through publications in peer-reviewed journals; presentations at stakeholders' events, professional and academic conferences; and short reports for stakeholders, including participating ICSs.

Project description:BackgroundIn Botswana, one fifth of the adult population is infected with HIV, with young women most at risk. Structural factors such as poverty, poor education, strong gender inequalities and gender violence render many young women unable to act on choices to protect themselves from HIV. A national trial is testing an intervention to assist young women to access government programs for returning to education, and improving livelihoods. Accessing marginalised young women (aged 16-29 and not in education, employment or training) through door-to-door recruitment has proved inefficient. We investigated social networks of young women to see if an approach based on an understanding of these networks could help with recruitment.MethodsThis mixed methods study used social network analysis to identify key young women in four communities (using in-degree centrality), and to describe the types of people that marginalised young women (n = 307) turn to for support (using descriptive statistics and then generalized linear mixed models to examine the support networks of sub-groups of participants). In discussion groups (n = 46 participants), the same young women helped explain results from the network analysis. We also tracked the recruitment method for each participant (door to door, peers, or key community informants).ResultsAlthough we were not able to identify characteristics of the most central young women in networks, we found that marginalised young women went most often to other women, usually in the same community, and with children, especially if they had children themselves. Rural women were better connected with each other than women in urban areas, though there were isolated young women in all communities. Peer recruitment contributed most in rural areas; door-to-door recruitment contributed most in urban areas.ConclusionsSince marginalised young women seek support from others like themselves, outreach programs could use networks of women to identify and engage those who most need help from government structural support programs. Methods that rely on social networks alone may be insufficient, and so a combination of approaches, including, for instance, peers, door-to-door recruitment, and key community informants, should be explored as a strategy for reaching marginalised young women for supportive interventions.

Dataset Information

Investigating informed choice in screening programmes: a mixed methods analysis.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Investigating informed choice in screening programmes: a mixed methods analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets