None listed
Conditions
Brief summary
Does provision of access to information targeted to certain user segments (age and gender), and presented as a set of FAQs, have a more beneficial effect on attitudes toward reduction of risk for colorectal cancer when compared to a generic information topic list? Aims / Objectives: 1) To determine the impact of different approaches to information provision regarding primary (e.g., diet, lifestyle) and secondary (e.g. screening) prevention of colorectal cancer 2) To assess the usability and acceptance of a web-based decision aid focussing on the strengthening of attitudes toward CRC prevention behaviours. Hypothesis: A website capable of delivering targeted, salient content in the form of FAQs will, when compared with the provision of generic content, improve attitudes toward prevention of colorectal cancer, specifically perceived risk and intention to participate in primary and secondary prevention.
Interventions
Pre-intervention: All participants logged on to a website from a location most convenient for them, using a personally-allocated ID, and completed a single-session baseline survey that took approximately 15 minutes to complete. The primary dependent measure collected was readiness to act on perceived personal colorectal cancer risk. Two weeks later following completion of the baseline survey, participants logged on again to the website from a convenient location. Participants were randomized to 1 of 4 groups, 3 intervention arms and one control, using pre-allocated ID numbers that had previously been block randomised. A computer algorithm restricted the availability of each website to the prescribed cohort, dependent upon the ID entered. Each intervention comprised a single website session lasting approximately 30 minutes (dependent upon the time taken by the participant to review the information presented). Intervention: A description of each intervention follows: Arm 1: FAQs: The FAQs website opened with a page entitled “Prevention of Bowel Cancer” and provided 6 icons that could be clicked on to “Get answers to some of the most Frequently Asked Questions by people in certain age groups”. Each icon included a picture of a man or woman selected to be representative of the age group together with words identifying gender and age (e.g., “I am a woman aged 35–49”). Clicking on the icon took the participant to a page that provided a further link to information to satisfy the top information needs of this group as previously identified . This page started with the “five most frequently asked questions” for the specified cohort and associated links to answers and was followed below by links to “OTHER questions asked…” This latter set of questions was also ordered by order of importance as identified . Arm 2: The LIST website was also entitled “Prevention of Bowel Cancer”. It was followed by the statement, “The information I want about bowel cancer is…” and a list of 10 links ordered according to the chronology of cancer diagnosis and treatment, with the exception of prevention being included at the end. Arm 3: The CHOICE website included both the LIST of information links and the FAQs icons on the initial page with the instruction “Get answers to some of the most Frequently Asked Questions by people in certain age groups, or view a list of categories of information about bowel cancer”. The location of the icons and the list was balanced so that half of CHOICE respondents viewed the icons on the right side of the screen and the list on the left, whereas the other half viewed the reverse order. Once a selection had been made, participants were treated as though they were assigned to the FAQs or LIST condition.
Sponsors
Study design
Eligibility
Inclusion criteria
Aged between 35 and 74 years.
Exclusion criteria
No exclusion criteria other than being outside the nominated age group.