Evaluating Strategies to Present Colon Cancer Screening Information
Comparing Screener vs. Survivor Role Models to Improve Colon Cancer Screening
2 other identifiers
interventional
486
1 country
1
Brief Summary
This is a study examining the effects of different educational-motivational materials about colorectal cancer screening on perceptions and intentions to get screened. Eligible participants will be randomized to one of three experimental conditions. All participants will be provided information about colon cancer and screening options based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Screen for Life materials. Some participants also will be asked to read a personal narrative about colon cancer screening. This study will determine whether participant's perceptions about and colorectal cancer screening intentions and behaviors differ by which information they read. Participants will complete surveys before, immediately after, and one month after randomization. To assess behavior change, as suggested by grant reviewers and the project officer, we added 6 and 12 month follow up surveys. Participants can complete all study requirements through the study website: http://HealthStudy.wustl.edu
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P75+ for not_applicable
Started Jun 2015
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
Study Start
First participant enrolled
June 1, 2015
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
June 18, 2015
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
June 30, 2015
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
January 31, 2017
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
January 31, 2017
CompletedResults Posted
Study results publicly available
November 15, 2018
CompletedNovember 15, 2018
October 1, 2018
1.7 years
June 18, 2015
May 2, 2018
October 18, 2018
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
Intentions to Get Screened for Colon Cancer
Intention was measured on all surveys with the mean of 3 items assessed using slider bars (coded 1=not at all - 100=extremely) asking about the likelihood of being screened in the next 6 months, the importance of screening, and commitment to screening. Higher scores indicate greater intentions to get screened for colorectal cancer.
Immediately post-intervention
Secondary Outcomes (6)
Identification With the Character
Immediately post-intervention
Three Measures of Engagement
Immediately post-intervention
Self-efficacy for Getting Screened for Colon Cancer
Immediately post-intervention
Affect
Immediately post-intervention
Defensive Information Processing
Immediately post-intervention
- +1 more secondary outcomes
Other Outcomes (3)
Social Influence
Immediately post-intervention
Worry
Immediately post-intervention
Perceived Benefits and Barriers of Colorectal Cancer Screening
Immediately post-intervention
Study Arms (3)
Information only
ACTIVE COMPARATORINTERVENTION: Information about colon cancer and screening tests from sources such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Screen for Life campaign.
Screener Narrative
EXPERIMENTALINTERVENTION: Information + Personal Narrative from someone who was screened for colon cancer
Survivor Narrative
EXPERIMENTALINTERVENTION: Information + Personal Narrative from someone who was screened for, and diagnosed with, colon cancer
Interventions
This study will compare the effects of adding narratives that describe personal experiences with colon cancer screening to educational information alone to explore potential differences in reactions to different role models on individuals' screening intentions and behaviors.
Educational materials such as those from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests.
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Male and female adults of any race or ethnicity living in the United States
- Age 50-75 years old
- Access to the Internet to complete all study requirements at http://HealthStudy.wustl.edu
You may not qualify if:
- Unable to read English
- Prior diagnosis of cancer (except non-melanoma skin cancer)
- Prior diagnosis of Crohn's disease, inflammatory bowel disease or colitis
- Currently adherent to colon cancer screening guidelines defined as a home-based stool blood test in the past 12 months, a sigmoidoscopy in the past 5 years, or a colonoscopy in the past 10 years.
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
Washington University website HeathStudy.wustl.edu
St Louis, Missouri, 63110, United States
Related Publications (12)
Weinstein ND, Kwitel A, McCaul KD, Magnan RE, Gerrard M, Gibbons FX. Risk perceptions: assessment and relationship to influenza vaccination. Health Psychol. 2007 Mar;26(2):146-51. doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.26.2.146.
PMID: 17385965BACKGROUNDSestir M, Green MC. You are who you watch: Identification and transportation effects on temporary self-concept. Social Influence 5(4): 272-88, 2010.
BACKGROUNDCrawford JR, Henry JD. The positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS): construct validity, measurement properties and normative data in a large non-clinical sample. Br J Clin Psychol. 2004 Sep;43(Pt 3):245-65. doi: 10.1348/0144665031752934.
PMID: 15333231BACKGROUNDGreen MC, Brock TC. The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2000 Nov;79(5):701-21. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.79.5.701.
PMID: 11079236BACKGROUNDMcQueen A, Kreuter MW, Kalesan B, Alcaraz KI. Understanding narrative effects: the impact of breast cancer survivor stories on message processing, attitudes, and beliefs among African American women. Health Psychol. 2011 Nov;30(6):674-82. doi: 10.1037/a0025395. Epub 2011 Sep 5.
PMID: 21895370BACKGROUNDMcQueen A, Kreuter MW. Women's cognitive and affective reactions to breast cancer survivor stories: a structural equation analysis. Patient Educ Couns. 2010 Dec;81 Suppl:S15-21. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2010.08.015. Epub 2010 Sep 17.
PMID: 20850258BACKGROUNDMcQueen A, Vernon SW, Swank PR. Construct definition and scale development for defensive information processing: an application to colorectal cancer screening. Health Psychol. 2013 Feb;32(2):190-202. doi: 10.1037/a0027311. Epub 2012 Feb 20.
PMID: 22353026BACKGROUNDMcQueen A, Swank PR, Vernon SW. Examining patterns of association with defensive information processing about colorectal cancer screening. J Health Psychol. 2014 Nov;19(11):1443-58. doi: 10.1177/1359105313493649. Epub 2013 Jul 17.
PMID: 23864072BACKGROUNDMcQueen A, Tiro JA, Vernon SW. Construct validity and invariance of four factors associated with colorectal cancer screening across gender, race, and prior screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2008 Sep;17(9):2231-7. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-08-0176.
PMID: 18768488BACKGROUNDWatson D, Clark LA, Tellegen A. Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1988 Jun;54(6):1063-70. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.54.6.1063.
PMID: 3397865BACKGROUNDVernon SW, Meissner H, Klabunde C, Rimer BK, Ahnen DJ, Bastani R, Mandelson MT, Nadel MR, Sheinfeld-Gorin S, Zapka J. Measures for ascertaining use of colorectal cancer screening in behavioral, health services, and epidemiologic research. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2004 Jun;13(6):898-905. No abstract available.
PMID: 15184243BACKGROUNDMcQueen A, Caburnay C, Kreuter M, Sefko J. Improving Adherence to Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Randomized Intervention to Compare Screener vs. Survivor Narratives. J Health Commun. 2019;24(2):141-155. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2019.1587109. Epub 2019 Mar 29.
PMID: 30924402DERIVED
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Results Point of Contact
- Title
- Amy McQueen
- Organization
- Washington University in St. Louis
Study Officials
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Amy McQueen, PhD
Washington University School of Medicine
Publication Agreements
- PI is Sponsor Employee
- No
- Restrictive Agreement
- No
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- SINGLE
- Who Masked
- PARTICIPANT
- Purpose
- PREVENTION
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
- PI Title
- Assistant Professor
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
June 18, 2015
First Posted
June 30, 2015
Study Start
June 1, 2015
Primary Completion
January 31, 2017
Study Completion
January 31, 2017
Last Updated
November 15, 2018
Results First Posted
November 15, 2018
Record last verified: 2018-10