The INSPIRE-Lung Study

NCT05824273 | Completed Results

• 2 other identifiers: Pro2022-08607R01CA263662-02
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 512
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

LungTalk and leveraging Facebook-targeted Advertisement (FBTA) addresses the call to develop and test multi-level, cancer communication interventions using innovative methods and designs. The study's long term goal is to increase lung cancer screening uptake among appropriate, high-risk individuals nationwide.

Conditions

Lung Cancer

Keywords

Lung cancer screening; Social media; Tailored interventions

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (19)

• Reaching Screening Eligible Individuals Via Social Media - Reach

  Leveraging a well-established, social media-based platform (Facebook) to target screening-eligible individuals in the community. This will be measured by the total number of people who saw the FBTA at least once.

  11-month period ad remained active on Facebook

• Reaching Screening Eligible Individuals Via Social Media - Link Clicks

  Leveraging a well-established, social media-based platform (Facebook) to target screening-eligible individuals in the community. This will be measured by the total number of clicks on the link within the FBTA that led to the REDCap survey platform of the study.

  11-month period ad remained active on Facebook

• Reaching Screening Eligible Individuals Via Social Media - Impressions

  Leveraging a well-established, social media-based platform (Facebook) to target screening-eligible individuals in the community. This will be measured by the total number of times the FBTA was on screen (may include multiple views of the ad by the same person/people).

  11-month period ad remained active on Facebook

• Effectiveness of LungTalk - Knowledge Assessment

  The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve total knowledge about lung screening. The total Knowledge of Lung Cancer Screening will be assessed with a 9-item multidimensional scale ranging from 0 to 9 with 0 being "No Knowledge" and 9 being "Complete knowledge".

  At baseline

• Effectiveness of LungTalk - Knowledge Assessment

  The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve total knowledge about lung screening. The total Knowledge of Lung Cancer Screening will be assessed with a 9-item multidimensional scale ranging from 0 to 9 with 0 being "No Knowledge" and 9 being "Complete knowledge".

  At one week from baseline survey completion

• Effectiveness of LungTalk - Perceived Risk

  The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve Perceived Risk. Perceived Risk of Lung Cancer is a 3-item scale with Likert-type responses. The range of scores is 3 to 12 (higher perceived risk of lung cancer).

  At baseline

• Effectiveness of LungTalk - Perceived Risk

  The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve Perceived Risk. Perceived Risk of Lung Cancer is a 3-item scale with Likert-type responses. The range of scores is 3 to 12 (higher perceived risk of lung cancer).

  At one week from baseline survey completion

• Effectiveness of LungTalk - Perceived Benefits

  The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve Perceived Benefits. Perceived Benefits of Lung Cancer Screening is a 6-item scale with responses ranging from 1=strongly disagree to 4=strongly agree. The range of scores is 6 to 24 (higher perceived benefits).

  At baseline

• Effectiveness of LungTalk - Perceived Benefits

  The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve Perceived Benefits. Perceived Benefits of Lung Cancer Screening is a 6-item scale with responses ranging from 1=strongly disagree to 4=strongly agree. The range of scores is 6 to 24 (higher perceived benefits).

  At one week from baseline survey completion

• Effectiveness of LungTalk - Perceived Barriers

  The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve Perceived Barriers. Perceived Barriers to Lung Cancer Screening. This scale has 17 items with four-point Likert responses where 1=strongly disagree and 4=strongly agree. The range of scores is 17 to 68 (higher perceived barriers).

  At baseline

• Effectiveness of LungTalk - Perceived Barriers

  The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve Perceived Barriers. Perceived Barriers to Lung Cancer Screening. This scale has 17 items with four-point Likert responses where 1=strongly disagree and 4=strongly agree. The range of scores is 17 to 68 (higher perceived barriers).

  At one week from baseline survey completion

• Effectiveness of LungTalk - Self-Efficacy

  The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve Self-Efficacy. Self-Efficacy for Lung Cancer Screening will be assessed using a scale with nine items with a four-point Likert response option to assess individual beliefs about ability to arrange and complete a low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) to screen for lung cancer. The range of scores is 9 to 36 (higher levels of self-efficacy).

  At baseline

• Effectiveness of LungTalk - Self-Efficacy

  The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve Self-Efficacy. Self-Efficacy for Lung Cancer Screening will be assessed using a scale with nine items with a four-point Likert response option to assess individual beliefs about ability to arrange and complete a low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) to screen for lung cancer. The range of scores is 9 to 36 (higher levels of self-efficacy).

  At one week from baseline survey completion

• Effectiveness of LungTalk - Occurrence of a Patient-Clinician Discussion

  The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve Occurrence of a Patient-Clinician Discussion. Occurrence of a Patient-Clinician Discussion about Lung Cancer Screening will be assessed with a single item requiring dichotomous (Y/N) response regarding a discussion with their healthcare provider.

  At baseline

• Effectiveness of LungTalk - Occurrence of a Patient-Clinician Discussion

  The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve Occurrence of a Patient-Clinician Discussion. Occurrence of a Patient-Clinician Discussion about Lung Cancer Screening will be assessed with a single item requiring dichotomous (Y/N) response regarding a discussion with their healthcare provider.

  At one week from baseline survey completion

• Effectiveness of LungTalk - Occurrence of a Patient-Clinician Discussion

  The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve Occurrence of a Patient-Clinician Discussion. Occurrence of a Patient-Clinician Discussion about Lung Cancer Screening will be assessed with a single item requiring dichotomous (Y/N) response regarding a discussion with their healthcare provider.

  At 6 months from baseline survey completion

• Effectiveness of LungTalk - Screening Uptake

  The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve Screening Uptake, Lung Cancer Screening Uptake will be assessed via self-report via the stages of adoption algorithm for lung screening. There are seven stages (unaware, aware but unengaged, undecided, decided not to act, decided to act, action, and maintenance).

  At baseline

• Effectiveness of LungTalk - Screening Uptake

  The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve Screening Uptake, Lung Cancer Screening Uptake will be assessed via self-report via the stages of adoption algorithm for lung screening. There are seven stages (unaware, aware but unengaged, undecided, decided not to act, decided to act, action, and maintenance).

  At one week from baseline survey completion

• Effectiveness of LungTalk - Screening Uptake

  The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve Screening Uptake, Lung Cancer Screening Uptake will be assessed via self-report via the stages of adoption algorithm for lung screening. There are seven stages (unaware, aware but unengaged, undecided, decided not to act, decided to act, action, and maintenance).

  At 6 months from baseline survey completion

Study Arms (2)

Tailored health communication intervention (LungTalk)

EXPERIMENTAL

Participants will receive the tailored health intervention "LungTalk". LungTalk is a 10-15 minute long computer-tailored health communication and decision-making tool that is theoretically grounded in the Conceptual Model on Lung Cancer Screening Participation.

Behavioral: LungTalk

Non-tailored Intervention

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

Participants will receive non-tailored American Cancer Society (ACS) Lung Screening Informational Video as per standard of care. ACS Lung Screening Informational Video (ACS LSIV) is a non-tailored 5-minute video from the American Cancer Society about lung cancer screening designed for the lay individual.

Behavioral: Non-tailored intervention - Standard of practice

Interventions

LungTalk BEHAVIORAL

LungTalk is a 10-15 minute long computer-tailored health communication and decision-making tool.

Tailored health communication intervention (LungTalk)

Non-tailored intervention - Standard of practice BEHAVIORAL

ACS Lung Screening Informational Video

Non-tailored Intervention

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 50 Years - 80 Years
• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: Yes
• Age Groups: Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

• ≥20-pack-year smoking history;
• Individuals who currently smoke or quit smoking within the past 15 years

You may not qualify if:

• Previously undergone LDCT for early detection of lung cancer, have a lung nodule or nodules that are currently being followed
• Has ever been diagnosed with lung cancer
• Individuals with impaired decision-making (because our primary outcome is decision-making, we will not include individuals with impaired decision-making)

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Hackensack Meridian Health: lead
• National Cancer Institute (NCI): collaborator

Study Sites (1)

Hackensack Meridian Health - Center for Discovery and Innovation

Nutley, New Jersey, 07110, United States

Location

Related Publications (56)

• Final recommendation statement: Lung cancer screening. U. S. Preventive Services Task Force. Updated March 9, 2021. Accessed May 26, 2021, 2021. https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/document/RecommendationStatementFinal/lung-cancer-screening

  BACKGROUND

• United States Preventive Services Task Force. Final recommendation statement: Lung cancer screening. Updated Updated December 2016. Accessed May 21, 2020. http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Document/RecommendationStatementFinal/lung-cancer-screening

  BACKGROUND

• National Lung Screening Trial Research Team; Aberle DR, Adams AM, Berg CD, Black WC, Clapp JD, Fagerstrom RM, Gareen IF, Gatsonis C, Marcus PM, Sicks JD. Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med. 2011 Aug 4;365(5):395-409. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1102873. Epub 2011 Jun 29.

  PMID: 21714641 BACKGROUND

• De Koning H. ES 02.01 The Dutch-Belgian Lung Cancer Screening Trial (NELSON). Journal of Thoracic Oncology. 2017;12(11):S1611. doi:10.1016/j.jtho.2017.09.108

  BACKGROUND

• Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Decision memo for screening for lung cancer with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) (CAG-00439N). Accessed May 21, 2020. https://www.cms.gov/medicare-coverage-database/details/nca-decision-memo.aspx?NCAId=274

  BACKGROUND

• Okereke IC, Nishi S, Zhou J, Goodwin JS. Trends in lung cancer screening in the United States, 2016-2017. J Thorac Dis. 2019 Mar;11(3):873-881. doi: 10.21037/jtd.2019.01.105.

  PMID: 31019776 BACKGROUND

• Carter-Harris L, Ceppa DP, Hanna N, Rawl SM. Lung cancer screening: what do long-term smokers know and believe? Health Expect. 2017 Feb;20(1):59-68. doi: 10.1111/hex.12433. Epub 2015 Dec 23.

  PMID: 26701339 BACKGROUND

• Carter-Harris L, Brandzel S, Wernli KJ, Roth JA, Buist DSM. A qualitative study exploring why individuals opt out of lung cancer screening. Fam Pract. 2017 Apr 1;34(2):239-244. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmw146.

  PMID: 28122849 BACKGROUND

• Carter-Harris L, Slaven JE Jr, Monahan PO, Shedd-Steele R, Hanna N, Rawl SM. Understanding lung cancer screening behavior: Racial, gender, and geographic differences among Indiana long-term smokers. Prev Med Rep. 2018 Feb 3;10:49-54. doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2018.01.018. eCollection 2018 Jun.

  PMID: 29552458 BACKGROUND

• Carter-Harris L, Comer RS, Goyal A, Vode EC, Hanna N, Ceppa D, Rawl SM. Development and Usability Testing of a Computer-Tailored Decision Support Tool for Lung Cancer Screening: Study Protocol. JMIR Res Protoc. 2017 Nov 16;6(11):e225. doi: 10.2196/resprot.8694.

  PMID: 29146565 BACKGROUND

• Chambers DA, Glasgow RE, Stange KC. The dynamic sustainability framework: addressing the paradox of sustainment amid ongoing change. Implement Sci. 2013 Oct 2;8:117. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-8-117.

  PMID: 24088228 BACKGROUND

• United States Preventive Services Task Force. Final recommendation statement: Lung cancer screening. Accessed October 10. http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Document/RecommendationStatementFinal/lung-cancer-screening

  BACKGROUND

• United States Preventive Services Task Force. Draft recommendation statement: lung cancer: Screening July 7, 2020. Accessed October 10. https://uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/draft-recommendation/lung-cancer-screening-2020

  BACKGROUND

• Carter-Harris L, Comer RS, Slaven Ii JE, Monahan PO, Vode E, Hanna NH, Ceppa DP, Rawl SM. Computer-Tailored Decision Support Tool for Lung Cancer Screening: Community-Based Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial. J Med Internet Res. 2020 Nov 3;22(11):e17050. doi: 10.2196/17050.

  PMID: 33141096 BACKGROUND

• Carter-Harris L, Tan AS, Salloum RG, Young-Wolff KC. Patient-provider discussions about lung cancer screening pre- and post-guidelines: Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS). Patient Educ Couns. 2016 Nov;99(11):1772-1777. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2016.05.014. Epub 2016 May 17.

  PMID: 27241830 BACKGROUND

• Carter-Harris L, Slaven JE 2nd, Monohan P, Rawl SM. Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the Lung Cancer Screening Health Belief Scales. Cancer Nurs. 2017 May/Jun;40(3):237-244. doi: 10.1097/NCC.0000000000000386.

  PMID: 27244666 BACKGROUND

• Carter-Harris L, Slaven JE 2nd, Monahan PO, Draucker CB, Vode E, Rawl SM. Understanding lung cancer screening behaviour using path analysis. J Med Screen. 2020 Jun;27(2):105-112. doi: 10.1177/0969141319876961. Epub 2019 Sep 24.

  PMID: 31550991 BACKGROUND

• Carter-Harris L, Bartlett Ellis R, Warrick A, Rawl S. Beyond Traditional Newspaper Advertisement: Leveraging Facebook-Targeted Advertisement to Recruit Long-Term Smokers for Research. J Med Internet Res. 2016 Jun 15;18(6):e117. doi: 10.2196/jmir.5502.

  PMID: 27306780 BACKGROUND

• Facebook Distribution of Users by Age Group in the U.S. Facebook. Accessed May 26, 2021, 2021. https://www.statista.com/statistics/187549/facebook-distribution-of-users-age-group-usa/

  BACKGROUND

• Frandsen M, Walters J, Ferguson SG. Exploring the viability of using online social media advertising as a recruitment method for smoking cessation clinical trials. Nicotine Tob Res. 2014 Feb;16(2):247-51. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntt157. Epub 2013 Oct 14.

  PMID: 24127266 BACKGROUND

• Ramo DE, Prochaska JJ. Broad reach and targeted recruitment using Facebook for an online survey of young adult substance use. J Med Internet Res. 2012 Feb 23;14(1):e28. doi: 10.2196/jmir.1878.

  PMID: 22360969 BACKGROUND

• Ramo DE, Hall SM, Prochaska JJ. Reaching young adult smokers through the internet: comparison of three recruitment mechanisms. Nicotine Tob Res. 2010 Jul;12(7):768-75. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntq086. Epub 2010 Jun 7.

  PMID: 20530194 BACKGROUND

• Ramo DE, Delucchi KL, Liu H, Hall SM, Prochaska JJ. Young adults who smoke cigarettes and marijuana: analysis of thoughts and behaviors. Addict Behav. 2014 Jan;39(1):77-84. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2013.08.035. Epub 2013 Sep 7.

  PMID: 24090626 BACKGROUND

• Smith A, Anderson M. Social media use in 2018. Pew Internet.org. Updated October 9. https://www.pewinternet.org/2018/03/01/social-media-use-in-2018/

  BACKGROUND

• United States Adults Social Platform Use. Social networking platforms' demographics update 2019. Marketingcharts.com,. Accessed October 9, https://www.marketingcharts.com/charts/us-adults-social-platform-use-demographic-group-2019/attachment/pew-social-platform-use-by-demographic-apr2019

  BACKGROUND

• Albada A, Ausems MG, Bensing JM, van Dulmen S. Tailored information about cancer risk and screening: a systematic review. Patient Educ Couns. 2009 Nov;77(2):155-71. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2009.03.005. Epub 2009 Apr 18.

  PMID: 19376676 BACKGROUND

• Krebs P, Prochaska JO, Rossi JS. A meta-analysis of computer-tailored interventions for health behavior change. Prev Med. 2010 Sep-Oct;51(3-4):214-21. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2010.06.004. Epub 2010 Jun 15.

  PMID: 20558196 BACKGROUND

• Noar SM, Benac CN, Harris MS. Does tailoring matter? Meta-analytic review of tailored print health behavior change interventions. Psychol Bull. 2007 Jul;133(4):673-93. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.133.4.673.

  PMID: 17592961 BACKGROUND

• Kreuter M, Farrell D, Olevitch L, Brennan L. Tailoring health messages: Customizing communication with computer technology. Tailoring health messages: Customizing communication with computer technology. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers; 2000:xiii, 270-xiii, 270.

  BACKGROUND

• Rawl SM, Skinner CS, Perkins SM, Springston J, Wang HL, Russell KM, Tong Y, Gebregziabher N, Krier C, Smith-Howell E, Brady-Watts T, Myers LJ, Ballard D, Rhyant B, Willis DR, Imperiale TF, Champion VL. Computer-delivered tailored intervention improves colon cancer screening knowledge and health beliefs of African-Americans. Health Educ Res. 2012 Oct;27(5):868-85. doi: 10.1093/her/cys094. Epub 2012 Aug 27.

  PMID: 22926008 BACKGROUND

• Ruffin MT 4th, Fetters MD, Jimbo M. Preference-based electronic decision aid to promote colorectal cancer screening: results of a randomized controlled trial. Prev Med. 2007 Oct;45(4):267-73. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2007.07.003. Epub 2007 Jul 14.

  PMID: 17689600 BACKGROUND

• Wu TY, Lin C. Developing and evaluating an individually tailored intervention to increase mammography adherence among Chinese American women. Cancer Nurs. 2015 Jan-Feb;38(1):40-9. doi: 10.1097/NCC.0000000000000126.

  PMID: 24621965 BACKGROUND

• Ahmad F, Cameron JI, Stewart DE. A tailored intervention to promote breast cancer screening among South Asian immigrant women. Soc Sci Med. 2005 Feb;60(3):575-86. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.05.018.

  PMID: 15550305 BACKGROUND

• Champion V, Foster JL, Menon U. Tailoring interventions for health behavior change in breast cancer screening. Cancer Pract. 1997 Sep-Oct;5(5):283-8.

  PMID: 9341350 BACKGROUND

• Lau YK, Caverly TJ, Cherng ST, Cao P, West M, Arenberg D, Meza R. Development and validation of a personalized, web-based decision aid for lung cancer screening using mixed methods: a study protocol. JMIR Res Protoc. 2014 Dec 19;3(4):e78. doi: 10.2196/resprot.4039.

  PMID: 25532218 BACKGROUND

• Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Lung cancer screening decision tool. Accessibility verified February 12, 2016. Accessed October 7, 2020. http://nomograms.mskcc.org/Lung/Screening.aspx

  BACKGROUND

• Chen Y, Marcus MW, Niaz A, Duffy SW, Field JK. My Lung Risk: a user-friendly, web-based calculator for risk assessment of lung cancer based on the validated Liverpool Lung Project risk prediction model. International Journal of Health Promotion and Education. 2014/05/04 2014;52(3):144-152. doi:10.1080/14635240.2014.888814

  BACKGROUND

• Volk RJ, Linder SK, Leal VB, Rabius V, Cinciripini PM, Kamath GR, Munden RF, Bevers TB. Feasibility of a patient decision aid about lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography. Prev Med. 2014 May;62:60-3. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2014.02.006. Epub 2014 Feb 8.

  PMID: 24518006 BACKGROUND

• Veterans Health Administration. Veterans Health Administration, Screening for lung cancer pamphlet. Accessibility verified February 12, 2016. Accessed September 29,. http://www.prevention.va.gov/docs/LungCancerScreeningHandout.pdf.

  BACKGROUND

• Dharod A, Bellinger C, Foley K, Case LD, Miller D. The Reach and Feasibility of an Interactive Lung Cancer Screening Decision Aid Delivered by Patient Portal. Appl Clin Inform. 2019 Jan;10(1):19-27. doi: 10.1055/s-0038-1676807. Epub 2019 Jan 9.

  PMID: 30625501 BACKGROUND

• Carter-Harris L, Davis LL, Rawl SM. Lung Cancer Screening Participation: Developing a Conceptual Model to Guide Research. Res Theory Nurs Pract. 2016 Nov 1;30(4):333-352. doi: 10.1891/1541-6577.30.4.333.

  PMID: 28304262 BACKGROUND

• McDonnell KK, Strayer SM, Sercy E, Campbell C, Friedman DB, Cartmell KB, Eberth JM. Developing and testing a brief clinic-based lung cancer screening decision aid for primary care settings. Health Expect. 2018 Aug;21(4):796-804. doi: 10.1111/hex.12675. Epub 2018 Feb 23.

  PMID: 29473696 BACKGROUND

• American Cancer Society. Cancer Screening Tests Videos. Accessed October 9. https://www.cancer.org/healthy/find-cancer-early/cancer-screening-tests-videos.html

  BACKGROUND

• American Cancer Society. Lung Cancer Screening Guidelines. Accessed October 9. https://www.cancer.org/health-care-professionals/american-cancer-society-prevention-early-detection-guidelines/lung-cancer-screening-guidelines.html

  BACKGROUND

• FACEBOOK for developers. Facebook Analytics Accessed October 9, 2020. https://developers.facebook.com/docs/analytics/

  BACKGROUND

• Glasgow RE, Vogt TM, Boles SM. Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: the RE-AIM framework. Am J Public Health. 1999 Sep;89(9):1322-7. doi: 10.2105/ajph.89.9.1322.

  PMID: 10474547 BACKGROUND

• Russomanno J, Patterson JG, Jabson Tree JM. Social Media Recruitment of Marginalized, Hard-to-Reach Populations: Development of Recruitment and Monitoring Guidelines. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2019 Dec 2;5(4):e14886. doi: 10.2196/14886.

  PMID: 31789598 BACKGROUND

• GO2 Foundation. Screening Centers of Excellence citation. Accessed October 9, 2020, (https://go2foundation.org/risk-early-detection/screening-centers/)

  BACKGROUND

• Raudenbush Stephen W, Bryk Anthony S, eds. Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods. 2 ed. SAGE Publications, Inc.; 2002.

  BACKGROUND

• Graham JW, Hofer SM, Donaldson SI, MacKinnon DP, Schafer JL. Analysis with missing data in prevention research. In: Bryant K, Windle M, West S, eds. The science of prevention: methodological advances from alcohol and substance abuse research. American Psychological Association; 1997:325-366.

  BACKGROUND

• Schafer JL, Olsen MK. Multiple Imputation for Multivariate Missing-Data Problems: A Data Analyst's Perspective. Multivariate Behav Res. 1998 Oct 1;33(4):545-71. doi: 10.1207/s15327906mbr3304_5.

  PMID: 26753828 BACKGROUND

• Hedeker D, Gibbons RD. Application of random-effects pattern-mixture models for missing data in longitudinal studies. Psychological Methods. 1997;2(1):64-78. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.2.1.64

  BACKGROUND

• Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y. On the Adaptive Control of the False Discovery Rate in Multiple Testing With Independent Statistics. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics. 2000;25(1):60-83. doi:10.3102/10769986025001060

  BACKGROUND

• Arigo D, Pagoto S, Carter-Harris L, Lillie SE, Nebeker C. Using social media for health research: Methodological and ethical considerations for recruitment and intervention delivery. Digit Health. 2018 May 7;4:2055207618771757. doi: 10.1177/2055207618771757. eCollection 2018 Jan-Dec.

  PMID: 29942634 BACKGROUND

• Carter-Bawa L, Banerjee SC, Comer RS, Kale MS, King JC, Leopold KT, Monahan PO, Ostroff JS, Slaven JE Jr, Valenzona F, Wiener RS, Rawl SM. Leveraging social media to increase lung cancer screening awareness, knowledge and uptake among high-risk populations (The INSPIRE-Lung Study): study protocol of design and methods of a community-based randomized controlled trial. BMC Public Health. 2023 May 26;23(1):975. doi: 10.1186/s12889-023-15857-8.

  PMID: 37237339 DERIVED

• Lisa CB, Banerjee SC, Ostroff JS, Kale MS, King JC, Leopold KT, Monahan PO, Slaven JE Jr, Wiener RS, Valenzona F, Rawl SM, Comer RS. Leveraging social media to increase lung cancer screening awareness, knowledge and uptake among high-risk populations (The INSPIRE-Lung Study): Study protocol of design and methods of a community-based randomized controlled trial. Res Sq [Preprint]. 2023 May 4:rs.3.rs-2846041. doi: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-2846041/v1.

  PMID: 37205569 DERIVED

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Lung Neoplasms

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Respiratory Tract Neoplasms; Thoracic Neoplasms; Neoplasms by Site; Neoplasms; Lung Diseases; Respiratory Tract Diseases

Results Point of Contact

• Title: Ana Vielma
• Organization: Hackensack Meridian Health - Center for Discovery and Innovation

ana.vielma@hmh-cdi.org

2018803100

Study Officials

• Lisa Carter-Bawa, PhD

  Hackensack Meridian Health

  PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Publication Agreements

• PI is Sponsor Employee: Yes

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: RANDOMIZED
• Masking: NONE
• Purpose: SCREENING
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: SPONSOR

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: April 10, 2023
• First Posted: April 21, 2023
• Study Start: August 2, 2023
• Primary Completion: July 30, 2024
• Study Completion: July 30, 2024
• Last Updated: November 21, 2025
• Results First Posted: November 21, 2025

Record last verified: 2025-11

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will not share

Locations

US (1)