Traditional Print Communication Methods, Simple Electronic Communication Methods, or Usual Care in Increasing How Often Older Women Undergo Colorectal Cancer Screening
|The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. Read our disclaimer for details.|
|ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00459030|
Recruitment Status : Completed
First Posted : April 11, 2007
Last Update Posted : August 19, 2013
RATIONALE: Finding out which communication method affects a participant's decision to undergo colorectal cancer screening may help increase the number of participants who undergo screening. It is not yet known which communication method is more effective in increasing how often participants undergo colorectal cancer screening.
PURPOSE: This randomized clinical trial is studying traditional print communication methods to see how well they work compared with simple electronic communication methods or usual care in increasing how often older women undergo colorectal cancer screening.
|Condition or disease||Intervention/treatment||Phase|
|Colorectal Cancer||Other: educational intervention via internet Other: educational intervention mailed Other: No additional educational intervention||Not Applicable|
- Compare traditional print versus simple electronic communication versus usual care, in terms of increasing colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates, in average-risk women attending a routine OB/Gyn visit.
- Explore the moderating role of attentional style and background variables on the impact of the interventions in these participants.
- Determine the mediating effect of potential cognitive-affective factors related to CRC screening in these participants.
- Investigate the comparative cost-effectiveness of these interventions to improve CRC screening adherence.
OUTLINE: This is a randomized study. Participants are randomized to 1 of 3 screening arms.
- Arm I: Participants are contacted by simple electronic communication methods by an email message linked to a personalized website.
- Arm II: Participants are contacted by traditional print communication methods.
- Arm III: Participants are observed (usual care). Participants in arms I and II are randomized a second time to receive messages about colorectal cancer screening that are matched or mismatched to their attentional style.
PROJECTED ACCRUAL: A total of 5,000 participants will be accrued for this study.
|Study Type :||Interventional (Clinical Trial)|
|Actual Enrollment :||904 participants|
|Intervention Model:||Parallel Assignment|
|Masking:||None (Open Label)|
|Primary Purpose:||Health Services Research|
|Official Title:||Two Delivery Channels to Improve CRC Screening|
|Study Start Date :||October 2005|
|Actual Primary Completion Date :||December 2012|
|Actual Study Completion Date :||December 2012|
Experimental: Print Communication
Cancer screening educational information mailed to patient's home one time after signing consent.
|Other: educational intervention mailed|
Experimental: Electronic communication
Cancer screening educational information delivered via a password protected internet site.
Other: educational intervention via internet
additional cancer screening information via password protected internet site
Active Comparator: No Health Communication
No additional cancer screening education information sent to patient.
|Other: No additional educational intervention|
- Comparison of traditional print versus simple electronic communication versus usual care in terms of increasing colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates [ Time Frame: End of study ]
- Moderating role of attentional style and background variables on the impact of the interventions [ Time Frame: End of Study ]
- Mediating effect of potential cognitive-affective factors related to CRC screening [ Time Frame: End of study ]
To learn more about this study, you or your doctor may contact the study research staff using the contact information provided by the sponsor.
Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (NCT number): NCT00459030
|United States, Pennsylvania|
|Fox Chase Cancer Center - Philadelphia|
|Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States, 19111-2497|
|Study Chair:||David Weinberg, MD, MSC||Fox Chase Cancer Center|