Breast Carcinoma
Conditions
Brief summary
This clinical trial tests how well the Women's Engagement for Cancer Awareness, Resources, and Education (WE-CARE) community health forums work to increase breast cancer screening and clinical trial participation for rural and low income women. Despite advances in breast cancer diagnosis and treatment in the past decade, rural-dwelling and underserved women, and Black, Indigenous, and people of color continue to experience low rates of breast cancer screening. Since the survival rate for breast cancer is largely dependent on stage at which it is diagnosed, later stage breast cancer is correlated to a poorer prognosis and higher mortality rate. The WE-CARE community health forms address structural barriers through culturally tailored educational sessions on breast cancer risk, screening and clinical trials, survivor storytelling to humanize cancer and research and patient navigation to facilitate mammogram screening and address barriers. The WE-CARE community health forums may be an effective way to increase breast cancer screening and clinical trial participation for rural and low income women.
Interventions
OTHEREducational Intervention
Attend education sessions at WE-CARE forum
BEHAVIORALPatient Navigation
Receive navigation support
OTHERSupportive Care
Attend storytelling sessions at WE-CARE forum
Sponsors
Mayo Clinic
Study design
Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
FEMALE
Age
50 Years to 74 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Female * Be between the ages of 50 and 74 years * Have no prior history of breast cancer screening (i.e., who have either never received a mammogram or have not had one in the past five years) * Reside in a rural community in Wisconsin or belong to low income (self-reported) * Be able to speak and understand English or Spanish * Be willing and able to provide informed consent
Exclusion criteria
* Women who have received a mammogram within the past five years * Have a current or prior diagnosis of breast cancer * Are currently undergoing treatment for any active malignancy * Have cognitive or psychiatric impairments that, in the judgment of the study team, would preclude meaningful participation
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Recruitment yield | At time of forum | Assessed via the number enrolled divided by the number of eligible participants approached. |
| Exposure reach (community level reach) | At time of forum | Assessed by the number of attendees divided by the estimated number of population indirectly exposed (e.g., via flyers, social media, community announcements). |
| Retention | From baseline to 3 months | Assessed by the number of participants who complete 3-month follow-up. |
| Perceived participant satisfaction | Immediately following completion of forum | Success is defined as ≥ 75% of participants rating the experience ≥ 4 on a 5-point scale rated on a 5-point scale where 1=strongly disagree and 5=strongly agree. Higher scores indicate greater perceived satisfaction. |
| Perceived barriers to engagement and community impact | Immediately following completion of forum | Assessed by post-intervention focus groups and brief qualitative interviews. Results will be analyzed descriptively. |
| Perceived facilitators to engagement and community impact | Immediately following completion of forum | Assessed by post-intervention focus groups and brief qualitative interviews. Results will be analyzed descriptively. |
| Perceived acceptability - AIM | Immediately following completion of forum | Assessed using the Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM), which consists of 4 items (e.g., meets my approval, is appealing to me) each rated on a 5-point scale where 1=strongly disagree and 5=strongly agree. Higher scores indicate greater perceived acceptability. |
| Perceived appropriateness - IAM | Immediately following completion of forum | Assessed using the Intervention Appropriateness Measure (IAM), which consists of 4 items (e.g., seems fitting, seems like a good match) each rated on a 5-point scale where 1=strongly disagree and 5=strongly agree. |
| Perceived feasibility - FIM | Immediately following completion of forum | Assessed using the Feasibility of Intervention Measure (FIM), which consists of 4 items (e.g., seems implementable, seems easy to use) each rated on a 5-point scale where 1=strongly disagree and 5=strongly agree. Higher scores indicate greater perceived acceptability. |
Countries
United States
Contacts
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORPravesh Sharma, MD
Mayo Clinic Health System-Eau Claire Clinic
Outcome results
None listed