Colorectal CancerNCT03569761
A Culturally-adapted Colorectal Cancer Screening Decision Aid Designed for American Indians
A study testing Colorectal Cancer Screening Decision Aid in people with Colorectal Cancer, run by UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Experts note that in order to continue reducing the US cancer burden, it is critical that investigators "more completely apply discoveries in cancer prevention we have already made." Thus, it is important to research strategies that aim to improve application of effective colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention and… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 50 to 75 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Colorectal Cancer
- What is being tested?
- Colorectal Cancer Screening Decision Aid
- Type of treatment
- Pill or oral medicine, Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 128 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 1 Aug 2017to 31 Aug 2019
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 50 to 75 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Aged 50-75
- Self-identify as AI (from any tribe)
- Are not up-to-date with recommended screening in accordance with USPSTF guidelines.
Who cannot join
- Patients who have a personal or family history of CRC or adenomatous polyps or inherited genetic conditions that increase CRC risk (familial adenomatous polyposis, Lynch syndrome, Turcot syndrome, Peutz-Jeghers syndrome, or MUTYH-associated polyposis)
- Unable to speak English
- Severe cognitive, visual, or hearing impairment that would prevent decision aid viewing.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Robeson Health Care Corporation
Lumberton, North Carolina, 28358
About this study
Official title: A Randomized Trial of a Culturally-adapted Colorectal Cancer Screening Decision Aid Designed for American Indians
Experts note that in order to continue reducing the US cancer burden, it is critical that investigators "more completely apply discoveries in cancer prevention we have already made." Thus, it is important to research strategies that aim to improve application of effective colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention and screening tests among underserved populations like American Indians (AI).CRC is the 2nd leading cause of cancer death among AI; yet, one of the most preventable and treatable cancers when detected early. Increased use of recommended CRC screening tests among men and women ages 50-75 have contributed to nearly 50% declines in US CRC mortality since 1990. However, recent evidence indicates AI have not observed equitable improvements. The investigators propose to build upon our experience addressing CRC screening in underserved populations and strong partnerships with North Carolina tribal partners to gain new insight about a patient-centered, culturally appropriate strategy to increase AI CRC screening.
Read the detailed description
Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Screening Options. CRC is a unique cancer due to the multiple screening options including stool-based (fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) and fecal immunochemical testing (FIT)), and direct visualization (colonoscopy) options. Healthcare providers tend to recommend colonoscopy, although evidence indicates that many patients, especially low-income and racial and ethnic minorities, prefer stool-based testing for a variety of reasons. In our formative work with North Carolina tribes, the investigators found evidence of low awareness of stool-based tests among American Indians (AI) and healthcare provider preferences to recommend colonoscopy. The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) guidelines indicate that evidence does not support favoring one CRC screening test above the others, and that recommendations should be based on patient preferences among the screening options. However, patient's general lack of knowledge of CRC screening modalities, literacy barriers to understanding differences between options, and other communication barriers in the healthcare setting (e.g., limited physician time) make this recommendation difficult to implement in practice without appropriate tools and support. Multimedia decision aids provide a practical solution to overcome communication challenges by providing patients information using easy-to-understand graphics and narratives designed to help them understand options, think through what is important to them, and engage with healthcare providers and family in the decision-making process.
CRC Screening Decision Aids. A recent systematic review and meta-analysis found evidence that average risk patients (aged 50 and over) exposed to CRC screening decisions aids showed greater increases in knowledge, were more likely to be interested in getting screened, and more likely to be screened. Most research on decision aids has been conduct with majority White populations; a few studies have focused on patients with low socioeconomic status. To our knowledge, no CRC screening decision aid studies have focused on AI populations.Our team has expertise in adapting CRC screening decision aids for underserved populations. The investigators have used a rigorous, community- and patient-engaged process to adapt a decision aid previously shown to be effective among majority White populations. The process retains effective elements of the existing version and refines content using messages and messengers that are culturally-sensitive (beyond peripheral packaging of graphics and visual content). A version the investigators adapted for low-income Hispanics significantly improved Hispanic patient's CRC screening knowledge, patient-provider communication, self-efficacy, and intent, and when combined with navigation, significantly improved completion of screening.
AI Barriers to CRC Screening. AI may benefit from decision aids; yet, CRC screening decision aids have not been developed or tested with AI populations. Several studies have found that AI have lower awareness and knowledge about CRC screening options and low perceived susceptibility of CRC than White populations. Many qualitative studies also indicate social and cultural barriers to CRC screening. For example, AIs indicate taboos related to speaking of illness or of certain body parts and fatalistic cultural beliefs influence their attitudes and intentions to obtain preventive medical services. In addition, a history of unethical healthcare practices and mistreatment of AI by the US government has led to issues of mistrust. Recent studies have found that AI report negative perceptions of medical providers and mistrust in healthcare institutions as barriers to obtaining CRC screening. Decision aids can address low awareness of options and improve attitudes and intentions for screening, especially if the content and the messengers of the information are adapted for sensitivity to relevant socio-cultural barriers (e.g., spiritual advisors who are credible to AI endorse screening). For this proposal, the investigators propose to test a novel culturally-adapted decision aid that aims to improve knowledge, attitudes and intentions to obtain CRC screening and uses messaging developed with our tribal community partners to overcome health literacy and socio-cultural barriers.
Conceptual Framework. Our decision aid is informed by the Theory of Planned Behavior and Cultural Identity Theory. The Theory of Planned Behavior posits that individual's attitudes (i.e., how one feels about a behavior and the potential outcomes of the behavior), norms (i.e., the amount of social pressure one feels to perform a behavior), and agency (i.e., the extent that one feels in control and able to perform a behavior) impacts their intentions to and subsequent performance of a behavior. The investigators also draw upon Cultural Identity Theory and posit that one's cultural identity and corresponding values underlie how one receives and interprets communicated messages and how one communicates with others about these messages. Our culturally-adapted decision aid uses messages that address AI-specific attitudes, norms, agency and communication concerns.
Preliminary Studies. With developmental funding from UNC's Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, the investigators followed a rigorous process to adapt a general population version of a CRC screening decision aid for AI. From January to May of 2016, the investigators conducted six focus groups (n=74) with AI (ages 50-75) and interviews with healthcare providers (n=8) from three North Carolina tribal communities. The investigators explored perspectives about cultural, communication, and literacy barriers to CRC screening, and identified critical themes regarding AI cultural identity and socio-cultural values that influence CRC screening. The investigators and our tribal partners have operationalized the themes into adaptations of the existing general population decision aid. The decision aid provides information on stool-based and colonoscopy tests, the two types readily available in the community. The investigators are filming and making edits to the decision aid, which will be completed and ready for pilot testing by December 2016. Themes from AI focus groups and operationalized changes to a culturally-adapted CRC screening decision aid Operationalized Changes Healthcare mistrust - concern that inappropriate medical tests are recommended by providers Religious advisor to provide information and conveys trust in CRC screening options AI collectivism - stronger 'family' and community orientation toward health than individual focus New messages emphasize the benefit of CRC screening to one's family and community Privacy concerns- indication of difficulties and discomfort talking about CRC screening with family Vignette that models family communication around CRC screening Fear of cancer and screening - fear of cancer and screening process reduces motivation for screening AI CRC survivor to share experience of being screened and treated early
Methods A. Setting Our current research is centered in North Carolina tribal communities, primarily with the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina, a state-recognized tribe that is located in Southeastern North Carolina. There are 62,306 Lumbee tribal members, the majority of whom (48,494) live in Robeson county. As with AI populations across the US, North Carolina AI have high rates of poverty and low educational attainment. One-third (33%) of AI in Robeson County are below the federal poverty level compared to 17% in North Carolina overall.45As a state-recognized tribe, Lumbee are not eligible for services through the federally-funded Indian Health Service,44 and many Lumbee tribal members use safety-net and federally qualified health centers such as the Robeson Health Care Corporation (RHCC), partner on this grant (see letter of support) to obtain health services.Robeson Health Care Corporation is a federally qualified health center with six clinics located in Robeson and neighboring counties. RHCC serves over 14,000 patients per year; 40% are AI. Nearly all, 95.6% of RHCC patients are at or below 200% of the federal poverty line. According to recent reports, 6,295 RHHC patients were not up-to-date with CRC screening following recommended guidelines.RHHC also has a long history of research collaboration on cancer screening projects.
- Conditions
- Colorectal Cancer
- Being tested
- Colorectal Cancer Screening Decision Aid, Control Group
- Keywords
- colorectal cancer screening, decision aids, American Indians
- Medical subject headings
- Colorectal Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Colorectal Cancer Screening Decision AidBehavioural
Information previously discussed in arm/group descriptions. There will be baseline, post-encounter, and 5-month follow-up assessments.
Control GroupBehavioural
Information previously discussed in arm/group descriptions. There will be baseline, post-encounter, and 5-month follow-up assessments. Information previously discussed in arm/group descriptions. There will be baseline, post-encounter, and 5-month follow-up assessments.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Decision Aid Video Intervention | Experimental | Participants randomized to the intervention group will view the AI culturally-adapted CRC screening decision aid in a private room at a RHCC clinic. The video will be viewed on an electronic tablet or laptop computer. Receives: Behavioral: Colorectal Cancer Screening Decision Aid |
| Control | Active comparator | Participants randomized to the control group will view an attention-control video about food safety in a private room at a RHCC clinic. The video will be viewed on an electronic tablet or laptop computer. The investigators chose the attention-control video so that the structure of the control arm mirrors the intervention arm. The food safety topic was chosen to provide information that is reasonably salient to the control arm participants but that would not be likely to affect encounters with healthcare providers. Receives: Behavioral: Control Group |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
CRC screening intentions
Measure of screening intent from prior CRC screening decision aid studies and assessed using a single categorical item regarding intentions to get CRC screening with four response options.
Measured: Immediately after participant views their respective assigned video. Five (5) months following the encounter, a research assistant will call and administer a follow-up survey.
Secondary outcomes (8)
Knowledge
Assessed by a six-item index (based on decision aid content). Items include 1) the availability of more than one option for CRC screening; 2) the availability of a home screening test; 3) the recommended age to begin CRC screening; 4) FOBT screening test frequency; 5) the need for sedation (and companion driver) for colonoscopy procedure, and 6) the existence of a small but non-zero complication risk associated with having colonoscopy.
Measured: Immediately after participant views their respective assigned video. Five (5) months following the encounter, a research assistant will call and administer a follow-up survey.
Attitudes
Assesses attitudes about how important items are for a participant's decision of whether or not to get CRC screening, including potential pros (e.g., having peace of mind after receiving clear findings) and cons (e.g., being worried or concerned that if you do the test you might find something wrong) with 4-point Likert-scale response options.
Measured: Immediately after participant views their respective assigned video. Five (5) months following the encounter, a research assistant will call and administer a follow-up survey.
Perceived social norms
Assesses the participant's belief that family, friends, and doctors think he/she should be screened.
Measured: Immediately after participant views their respective assigned video. Five (5) months following the encounter, a research assistant will call and administer a follow-up survey.
Personal agency
Assesses confidence to complete screening with 4-point Likert-scale response options (i.e., not at all confident, not very confident, confident, very confident).
Measured: Immediately after participant views their respective assigned video. Five (5) months following the encounter, a research assistant will call and administer a follow-up survey.
CRC screening preferences
Measures screening preferences from prior studies.
Measured: Immediately after participant views their respective assigned video. Five (5) months following the encounter, a research assistant will call and administer a follow-up survey.
Healthcare provider communication
Assessed with a participant-reported measure of having had a CRC screening discussion with a healthcare provider in the prior 5 months based on items used in a national survey.
Measured: Immediately after participant views their respective assigned video. Five (5) months following the encounter, a research assistant will call and administer a follow-up survey.
Family and friend communication
Assessed using a measured adapted from a study on family communication about cancer screening. Participants asked to enumerate social network members and will be asked to identify members with whom they discussed CRC screening.
Measured: Immediately after participant views their respective assigned video. Five (5) months following the encounter, a research assistant will call and administer a follow-up survey.
CRC screening completion
Dichotomous indicator of whether or not the participant completed any of the recommended CRC screening tests.
Measured: Immediately after participant views their respective assigned video. Five (5) months following the encounter, a research assistant will call and administer a follow-up survey.
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted26 Jun 2018
- Study start1 Aug 2017
- Primary completion25 Sep 2018
- Study completion31 Aug 2019
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Colorectal CancerStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer CenterThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- The investigators will use a two-group randomized controlled trial to achieve our aims. Participants (n=120) will be randomized to view the AI culturally-adapted decision aid or an attention-control (i.e., food safety) video. The study flow diagram (Figure 2) indicates the recruitment, randomization, and assessment process.Our research to develop and evaluate the decision aid is approved by the Lumbee Tribal Council and the institutional review board (IRB) at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 128 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Leah Frerichs, PhD, Principal investigator, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03569761
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- LCCC 1711
- Status last verified
- Dec 2021
- First submitted
- 9 Oct 2017
- Last updated
- 20 Dec 2021
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Frerichs L, Beasley C, Pevia K, Lowery J, Ferrari R, Bell R, Reuland D. Testing a Culturally Adapted Colorectal Cancer Screening Decision Aid Among American Indians: Results from a Pre-Post Trial. Health Equity. 2020 Apr 1;4(1):91-98. doi: 10.1089/heq.2019.0095. eCollection 2020.
PubMed 32258960
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 20 Dec 2021. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Randomized Trial of a Culturally-adapted Colorectal Cancer Screening Decision Aid Designed for American Indians
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03569761
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- LCCC 1711
- Conditions
- Colorectal Cancer
- Keywords
- colorectal cancer screening, decision aids, American Indians
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 128 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer CenterUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Aug 2017 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 25 Sep 2018 (actual)
- Study completion
- 31 Aug 2019 (actual)
- First posted
- 26 Jun 2018 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Experts note that in order to continue reducing the US cancer burden, it is critical that investigators "more completely apply discoveries in cancer prevention we have already made." Thus, it is important to research strategies that aim to improve application of effective colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention and screening tests among underserved populations like American Indians (AI).CRC is the 2nd leading cause of cancer death among AI; yet, one of the most preventable and treatable cancers when detected early. Increased use of recommended CRC screening tests among men and women ages 50-75 have contributed to nearly 50% declines in US CRC mortality since 1990. However, recent evidence indicates AI have not observed equitable improvements. The investigators propose to build upon our experience addressing CRC screening in underserved populations and strong partnerships with North Carolina tribal partners to gain new insight about a patient-centered, culturally appropriate strategy to increase AI CRC screening.
Detailed description
Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Screening Options. CRC is a unique cancer due to the multiple screening options including stool-based (fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) and fecal immunochemical testing (FIT)), and direct visualization (colonoscopy) options. Healthcare providers tend to recommend colonoscopy, although evidence indicates that many patients, especially low-income and racial and ethnic minorities, prefer stool-based testing for a variety of reasons. In our formative work with North Carolina tribes, the investigators found evidence of low awareness of stool-based tests among American Indians (AI) and healthcare provider preferences to recommend colonoscopy. The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) guidelines indicate that evidence does not support favoring one CRC screening test above the others, and that recommendations should be based on patient preferences among the screening options. However, patient's general lack of knowledge of CRC screening modalities, literacy barriers to understanding differences between options, and other communication barriers in the healthcare setting (e.g., limited physician time) make this recommendation difficult to implement in practice without appropriate tools and support. Multimedia decision aids provide a practical solution to overcome communication challenges by providing patients information using easy-to-understand graphics and narratives designed to help them understand options, think through what is important to them, and engage with healthcare providers and family in the decision-making process.
CRC Screening Decision Aids. A recent systematic review and meta-analysis found evidence that average risk patients (aged 50 and over) exposed to CRC screening decisions aids showed greater increases in knowledge, were more likely to be interested in getting screened, and more likely to be screened. Most research on decision aids has been conduct with majority White populations; a few studies have focused on patients with low socioeconomic status. To our knowledge, no CRC screening decision aid studies have focused on AI populations.Our team has expertise in adapting CRC screening decision aids for underserved populations. The investigators have used a rigorous, community- and patient-engaged process to adapt a decision aid previously shown to be effective among majority White populations. The process retains effective elements of the existing version and refines content using messages and messengers that are culturally-sensitive (beyond peripheral packaging of graphics and visual content). A version the investigators adapted for low-income Hispanics significantly improved Hispanic patient's CRC screening knowledge, patient-provider communication, self-efficacy, and intent, and when combined with navigation, significantly improved completion of screening.
AI Barriers to CRC Screening. AI may benefit from decision aids; yet, CRC screening decision aids have not been developed or tested with AI populations. Several studies have found that AI have lower awareness and knowledge about CRC screening options and low perceived susceptibility of CRC than White populations. Many qualitative studies also indicate social and cultural barriers to CRC screening. For example, AIs indicate taboos related to speaking of illness or of certain body parts and fatalistic cultural beliefs influence their attitudes and intentions to obtain preventive medical services. In addition, a history of unethical healthcare practices and mistreatment of AI by the US government has led to issues of mistrust. Recent studies have found that AI report negative perceptions of medical providers and mistrust in healthcare institutions as barriers to obtaining CRC screening. Decision aids can address low awareness of options and improve attitudes and intentions for screening, especially if the content and the messengers of the information are adapted for sensitivity to relevant socio-cultural barriers (e.g., spiritual advisors who are credible to AI endorse screening). For this proposal, the investigators propose to test a novel culturally-adapted decision aid that aims to improve knowledge, attitudes and intentions to obtain CRC screening and uses messaging developed with our tribal community partners to overcome health literacy and socio-cultural barriers.
Conceptual Framework. Our decision aid is informed by the Theory of Planned Behavior and Cultural Identity Theory. The Theory of Planned Behavior posits that individual's attitudes (i.e., how one feels about a behavior and the potential outcomes of the behavior), norms (i.e., the amount of social pressure one feels to perform a behavior), and agency (i.e., the extent that one feels in control and able to perform a behavior) impacts their intentions to and subsequent performance of a behavior. The investigators also draw upon Cultural Identity Theory and posit that one's cultural identity and corresponding values underlie how one receives and interprets communicated messages and how one communicates with others about these messages. Our culturally-adapted decision aid uses messages that address AI-specific attitudes, norms, agency and communication concerns.
Preliminary Studies. With developmental funding from UNC's Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, the investigators followed a rigorous process to adapt a general population version of a CRC screening decision aid for AI. From January to May of 2016, the investigators conducted six focus groups (n=74) with AI (ages 50-75) and interviews with healthcare providers (n=8) from three North Carolina tribal communities. The investigators explored perspectives about cultural, communication, and literacy barriers to CRC screening, and identified critical themes regarding AI cultural identity and socio-cultural values that influence CRC screening. The investigators and our tribal partners have operationalized the themes into adaptations of the existing general population decision aid. The decision aid provides information on stool-based and colonoscopy tests, the two types readily available in the community. The investigators are filming and making edits to the decision aid, which will be completed and ready for pilot testing by December 2016. Themes from AI focus groups and operationalized changes to a culturally-adapted CRC screening decision aid Operationalized Changes Healthcare mistrust - concern that inappropriate medical tests are recommended by providers Religious advisor to provide information and conveys trust in CRC screening options AI collectivism - stronger 'family' and community orientation toward health than individual focus New messages emphasize the benefit of CRC screening to one's family and community Privacy concerns- indication of difficulties and discomfort talking about CRC screening with family Vignette that models family communication around CRC screening Fear of cancer and screening - fear of cancer and screening process reduces motivation for screening AI CRC survivor to share experience of being screened and treated early
Methods A. Setting Our current research is centered in North Carolina tribal communities, primarily with the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina, a state-recognized tribe that is located in Southeastern North Carolina. There are 62,306 Lumbee tribal members, the majority of whom (48,494) live in Robeson county. As with AI populations across the US, North Carolina AI have high rates of poverty and low educational attainment. One-third (33%) of AI in Robeson County are below the federal poverty level compared to 17% in North Carolina overall.45As a state-recognized tribe, Lumbee are not eligible for services through the federally-funded Indian Health Service,44 and many Lumbee tribal members use safety-net and federally qualified health centers such as the Robeson Health Care Corporation (RHCC), partner on this grant (see letter of support) to obtain health services.Robeson Health Care Corporation is a federally qualified health center with six clinics located in Robeson and neighboring counties. RHCC serves over 14,000 patients per year; 40% are AI. Nearly all, 95.6% of RHCC patients are at or below 200% of the federal poverty line. According to recent reports, 6,295 RHHC patients were not up-to-date with CRC screening following recommended guidelines.RHHC also has a long history of research collaboration on cancer screening projects.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- The investigators will use a two-group randomized controlled trial to achieve our aims. Participants (n=120) will be randomized to view the AI culturally-adapted decision aid or an attention-control (i.e., food safety) video. The study flow diagram (Figure 2) indicates the recruitment, randomization, and assessment process.Our research to develop and evaluate the decision aid is approved by the Lumbee Tribal Council and the institutional review board (IRB) at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Decision Aid Video Intervention | Experimental | Behavioral: Colorectal Cancer Screening Decision AidParticipants randomized to the intervention group will view the AI culturally-adapted CRC screening decision aid in a private room at a RHCC clinic. The video will be viewed on an electronic tablet or laptop computer. |
| Control | Active comparator | Behavioral: Control GroupParticipants randomized to the control group will view an attention-control video about food safety in a private room at a RHCC clinic. The video will be viewed on an electronic tablet or laptop computer. The investigators chose the attention-control video so that the structure of the control arm mirrors the intervention arm. The food safety topic was chosen to provide information that is reasonably salient to the control arm participants but that would not be likely to affect encounters with healthcare providers. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 50 to 75 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Aged 50-75
- Self-identify as AI (from any tribe)
- Are not up-to-date with recommended screening in accordance with USPSTF guidelines.
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Patients who have a personal or family history of CRC or adenomatous polyps or inherited genetic conditions that increase CRC risk (familial adenomatous polyposis, Lynch syndrome, Turcot syndrome, Peutz-Jeghers syndrome, or MUTYH-associated polyposis)
- Unable to speak English
- Severe cognitive, visual, or hearing impairment that would prevent decision aid viewing.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Colorectal Cancer Screening Decision AidInformation previously discussed in arm/group descriptions. There will be baseline, post-encounter, and 5-month follow-up assessments. | Behavioural | Decision Aid Video Intervention |
| Control GroupInformation previously discussed in arm/group descriptions. There will be baseline, post-encounter, and 5-month follow-up assessments. Information previously discussed in arm/group descriptions. There will be baseline, post-encounter, and 5-month follow-up assessments. | Behavioural | Control |
Primary outcome
CRC screening intentions
Time frame: Immediately after participant views their respective assigned video. Five (5) months following the encounter, a research assistant will call and administer a follow-up survey.
Measure of screening intent from prior CRC screening decision aid studies and assessed using a single categorical item regarding intentions to get CRC screening with four response options.
8 secondary outcomes
Knowledge
Time frame: Immediately after participant views their respective assigned video. Five (5) months following the encounter, a research assistant will call and administer a follow-up survey.
Attitudes
Time frame: Immediately after participant views their respective assigned video. Five (5) months following the encounter, a research assistant will call and administer a follow-up survey.
Perceived social norms
Time frame: Immediately after participant views their respective assigned video. Five (5) months following the encounter, a research assistant will call and administer a follow-up survey.
Personal agency
Time frame: Immediately after participant views their respective assigned video. Five (5) months following the encounter, a research assistant will call and administer a follow-up survey.
CRC screening preferences
Time frame: Immediately after participant views their respective assigned video. Five (5) months following the encounter, a research assistant will call and administer a follow-up survey.
Healthcare provider communication
Time frame: Immediately after participant views their respective assigned video. Five (5) months following the encounter, a research assistant will call and administer a follow-up survey.
Family and friend communication
Time frame: Immediately after participant views their respective assigned video. Five (5) months following the encounter, a research assistant will call and administer a follow-up survey.
CRC screening completion
Time frame: Immediately after participant views their respective assigned video. Five (5) months following the encounter, a research assistant will call and administer a follow-up survey.
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 20 Dec 2021.
- Results publication: PubMed 32258960Frerichs L, Beasley C, Pevia K, Lowery J, Ferrari R, Bell R, Reuland D. Testing a Culturally Adapted Colorectal Cancer Screening Decision Aid Among American Indians: Results from a Pre-Post Trial. Health Equity. 2020 Apr 1;4(1):91-98. doi: 10.1089/heq.2019.0095. eCollection 2020.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Colorectal Cancer
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
Hepatic Artery Infusion of Carfilzomib in Participants With Liver Metastatic Disease Previously Treated With Hepatic Artery Infusion Pump Therapy
Colorectal Neoplasms, Neoplasms
Active, not recruiting
Streamlined Geriatric and Oncological Evaluation Based On IC Technology
Breast Cancer, Comorbidities and Coexisting Conditions
RecruitingObservational study
Pre- and On-treatment Multi-omics Profiling of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer
Rectal Neoplasms
Enrolling by invitationObservational study
Natural History Study of Early Life Exposures in Agriculture (ELEA)
Prostate Cancer, Leukemia
RecruitingPhase 2
Tislelizumab in People With Colorectal Cancer
Colorectal Cancer
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Leah Frerichs, PhD principal investigator
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Colorectal Cancer Screening Decision Aid in people with Colorectal Cancer, run by UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 20 Dec 2021. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
CRC screening intentions (time frame: Immediately after participant views their respective assigned video. Five (5) months following the encounter, a research assistant will call and administer a follow-up survey.). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT03569761, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 20 Dec 2021.