Evaluating Strategies to Present Colon Cancer Screening Information
Sponsor
Washington University School of Medicine (Other)
Overall Status
Completed
CT.gov ID
NCT02485561
Collaborator
National Cancer Institute (NCI) (NIH)
486
1
3
20
24.3
Study Details
Study Description
Brief Summary
This is a study examining the effects of different educational-motivational materials about colorectal cancer screening on perceptions and intentions to get screened. Eligible participants will be randomized to one of three experimental conditions. All participants will be provided information about colon cancer and screening options based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Screen for Life materials. Some participants also will be asked to read a personal narrative about colon cancer screening. This study will determine whether participant's perceptions about and colorectal cancer screening intentions and behaviors differ by which information they read. Participants will complete surveys before, immediately after, and one month after randomization. To assess behavior change, as suggested by grant reviewers and the project officer, we added 6 and 12 month follow up surveys.
Participants can complete all study requirements through the study website:
| Condition or Disease | Intervention/Treatment | Phase |
|---|---|---|
|
N/A |
Detailed Description
The use of patient narratives in interventions and their availability on the Internet is becoming ubiquitous and has far outpaced empirical research to assess how and for whom narratives are effective. To improve future behavioral interventions that incorporate narratives, researchers need to identify the best role models to promote colon cancer screening and examine their potentially different mechanisms of influence.
For the proposed web-based, 3-arm English-language pilot intervention with a brief, 1 month follow-up, the study investigators will randomize 400 average-risk adults age 50-75 who are non-adherent to colon cancer screening guidelines and have no cancer history to one of three groups to read: 1) basic information about colon cancer risk and test options, 2) the same colon cancer and screening information plus a narrative from a colon cancer survivor, or 3) the same colon cancer and screening information plus a narrative from someone who got screened for colon cancer. To better assess behavior change, a 6 and 12 month follow up survey was added.
All participants will read general information about colon cancer and screening guidelines, test options, and benefits based on Centers for Disease Control and Prevention educational materials. Narrative participants will then view a role model that is tailored to each participant by gender, race/ ethnicity, and age group. Along with a photo will be a brief message to identify role models as colon cancer survivors or screeners. Narrative conditions will include a single role model and story of first-person experiences of colonoscopy. Participants will complete survey measures before and after the information and stories are presented and at one, 6, and 12 month follow-up. Participation in the first part of the study will take about 30 minutes and about 15 minutes for the follow up survey. Participants can complete all study requirements through our website: http://HealthStudy.wustl.edu
This study will examine potential mediators or mechanisms that explain the effects of these narratives on screening-related outcomes based on a proposed conceptual model. The study investigators will enroll a diverse sample of participants to explore any differences in narrative effects by audience characteristics (potential moderators).
Study Design
Study Type:
Interventional
Actual Enrollment
:
486 participants
Allocation:
Randomized
Intervention Model:
Parallel Assignment
Masking:
Single (Participant)
Primary Purpose:
Prevention
Official Title:
Comparing Screener vs. Survivor Role Models to Improve Colon Cancer Screening
Actual Study Start Date
:
Jun 1, 2015
Actual Primary Completion Date
:
Jan 31, 2017
Actual Study Completion Date
:
Jan 31, 2017
Arms and Interventions
| Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
|---|---|
| Active Comparator: Information only INTERVENTION: Information about colon cancer and screening tests from sources such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Screen for Life campaign. |
Behavioral: Education information
Educational materials such as those from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests.
|
| Experimental: Screener Narrative INTERVENTION: Information + Personal Narrative from someone who was screened for colon cancer |
Behavioral: Health communication intervention
This study will compare the effects of adding narratives that describe personal experiences with colon cancer screening to educational information alone to explore potential differences in reactions to different role models on individuals' screening intentions and behaviors.
Behavioral: Education information
Educational materials such as those from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests.
|
| Experimental: Survivor Narrative INTERVENTION: Information + Personal Narrative from someone who was screened for, and diagnosed with, colon cancer |
Behavioral: Health communication intervention
This study will compare the effects of adding narratives that describe personal experiences with colon cancer screening to educational information alone to explore potential differences in reactions to different role models on individuals' screening intentions and behaviors.
Behavioral: Education information
Educational materials such as those from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests.
|
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
- Intentions to Get Screened for Colon Cancer [Immediately post-intervention]
Intention was measured on all surveys with the mean of 3 items assessed using slider bars (coded 1=not at all - 100=extremely) asking about the likelihood of being screened in the next 6 months, the importance of screening, and commitment to screening. Higher scores indicate greater intentions to get screened for colorectal cancer.
Secondary Outcome Measures
- Identification With the Character [Immediately post-intervention]
Participants assigned to narrative conditions were asked if they liked and felt similar to the character in the story they read with 3 items each with response options 1=Strongly Disagree - 5=Strongly Agree. Measures were based on previous work by the study investigators. Mean scores for liking and similarity were created; higher scores reflect higher perceived similarity and liking for the character. Means will be compared between the two groups assigned to read a narrative.
- Three Measures of Engagement [Immediately post-intervention]
Confirmatory factor analyses did not support an aggregate measure adapted from an existing transportation scale, so a single item "What I just read affected me emotionally" was used to measure emotional engagement for all participants. For participants assigned to either narrative condition, two items reflected cognitive (imagery) engagement "While I was reading the story, I could easily picture the events in it taking place" and "I had a vivid mental image of the person in the story". Mean scores were created for cognitive engagement. Two items reflected self-referencing engagement: "I could picture myself in the scene of the events described in the story" and "The events in the story are relevant to my life" were assessed and mean scores created for self-referencing engagement. Responses for all items were 1=Not at all - 7=Very much. Higher mean scores reflected higher engagement.
- Self-efficacy for Getting Screened for Colon Cancer [Immediately post-intervention]
Six items assess confidence in getting screened for colon cancer despite common barriers. Mean scores are created from response options that range from 1=not at all confident to 7=very confident. Higher scores reflect greater confidence in getting colorectal cancer screening. Means will be compared between all three study groups.
- Affect [Immediately post-intervention]
Using the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule, we assessed the strength of 5 positive (happy, proud, strong, inspired, hopeful) and 5 negative (angry, guilty, sad, nervous, afraid) emotions felt during the assigned reading (1=Not at all - 7=Extremely). Higher mean subscale scores reflect stronger positive and negative emotions. Means will be compared between all three study groups.
- Defensive Information Processing [Immediately post-intervention]
Seven scales assessing defensive information processing will be assessed using previously validated measures for opt-out behavior (3 items), opt-out information (1 item), blunting (2 items), self-exemption (5 items), deny immediacy (3 items), counterarguing (4 items), and minimize the harm (2 items). Response options range from 1=strongly disagree to 7=strongly agree. Mean scores are created for each scale and higher scores reflect greater defensive information processing. Means will be compared between all three study groups.
- Absolute Perceived Susceptibility to Colon Cancer [Immediately post-intervention]
Absolute perceived risk was assessed with three items: I am at risk for developing colorectal cancer, If I do not get screened regularly, I would feel vulnerable to developing colorectal cancer, If I do not get screened regularly, it is likely that I will develop colorectal cancer. Response options range from 1=strongly disagree to 5=strongly agree. Mean scale scores were created and higher scores reflect greater perceived susceptibility to colorectal cancer. Mean scores will be compared between all three study groups.
Other Outcome Measures
- Social Influence [Immediately post-intervention]
Social influence will be assessed with three items developed for this study based on standard measures that include physician, family, and friends as important social referents encouraging colorectal cancer screening. Response options range from 1=strongly disagree to 7=strongly agree. Mean scores were created and higher scores reflect greater perceived social influence for getting screened for colorectal cancer. Means will be compared between all three study groups.
- Worry [Immediately post-intervention]
Worry was assessed with four items regarding worry about getting colorectal cancer, having a test that shows they have colorectal cancer, concern that colorectal cancer screening will be physically uncomfortable, and concern that there could be complications from the test. Response options ranged from 1=strongly disagree to 5=strongly agree. Mean scores were created (Range 1-5); higher scores reflect greater worry. Means will be compared between all three study groups.
- Perceived Benefits and Barriers of Colorectal Cancer Screening [Immediately post-intervention]
Perceived colorectal cancer screening benefits (8 items) barriers (6 items) are assessed with items from previously validated scales. Response options range from 1=strongly disagree to 7=strongly agree. Mean scores were created for each scale; higher scores reflect greater perceived benefits and barriers of getting screened. Means will be compared between all three study groups.
Eligibility Criteria
Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study:
50 Years
to 75 Years
Sexes Eligible for Study:
All
Accepts Healthy Volunteers:
Yes
Inclusion Criteria:
-
Male and female adults of any race or ethnicity living in the United States
-
Age 50-75 years old
-
Access to the Internet to complete all study requirements at http://HealthStudy.wustl.edu
Exclusion Criteria:
-
Unable to read English
-
Prior diagnosis of cancer (except non-melanoma skin cancer)
-
Prior diagnosis of Crohn's disease, inflammatory bowel disease or colitis
-
Currently adherent to colon cancer screening guidelines defined as a home-based stool blood test in the past 12 months, a sigmoidoscopy in the past 5 years, or a colonoscopy in the past 10 years.
Contacts and Locations
Locations
| Site | City | State | Country | Postal Code | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Washington University website HeathStudy.wustl.edu | Saint Louis | Missouri | United States | 63110 |
Sponsors and Collaborators
- Washington University School of Medicine
- National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Amy McQueen, PhD, Washington University School of Medicine
Study Documents (Full-Text)
More Information
Publications
- Crawford JR, Henry JD. The positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS): construct validity, measurement properties and normative data in a large non-clinical sample. Br J Clin Psychol. 2004 Sep;43(Pt 3):245-65.
- Green MC, Brock TC. The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2000 Nov;79(5):701-21.
- McQueen A, Kreuter MW, Kalesan B, Alcaraz KI. Understanding narrative effects: the impact of breast cancer survivor stories on message processing, attitudes, and beliefs among African American women. Health Psychol. 2011 Nov;30(6):674-82. doi: 10.1037/a0025395. Epub 2011 Sep 5.
- McQueen A, Kreuter MW. Women's cognitive and affective reactions to breast cancer survivor stories: a structural equation analysis. Patient Educ Couns. 2010 Dec;81 Suppl:S15-21. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2010.08.015. Epub 2010 Sep 17.
- McQueen A, Swank PR, Vernon SW. Examining patterns of association with defensive information processing about colorectal cancer screening. J Health Psychol. 2014 Nov;19(11):1443-58. doi: 10.1177/1359105313493649. Epub 2013 Jul 17.
- McQueen A, Tiro JA, Vernon SW. Construct validity and invariance of four factors associated with colorectal cancer screening across gender, race, and prior screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2008 Sep;17(9):2231-7. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-08-0176.
- McQueen A, Vernon SW, Swank PR. Construct definition and scale development for defensive information processing: an application to colorectal cancer screening. Health Psychol. 2013 Feb;32(2):190-202. doi: 10.1037/a0027311. Epub 2012 Feb 20. Review.
- Sestir M, Green MC. You are who you watch: Identification and transportation effects on temporary self-concept. Social Influence 5(4): 272-88, 2010.
- Vernon SW, Meissner H, Klabunde C, Rimer BK, Ahnen DJ, Bastani R, Mandelson MT, Nadel MR, Sheinfeld-Gorin S, Zapka J. Measures for ascertaining use of colorectal cancer screening in behavioral, health services, and epidemiologic research. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2004 Jun;13(6):898-905.
- Watson D, Clark LA, Tellegen A. Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1988 Jun;54(6):1063-70.
- Weinstein ND, Kwitel A, McCaul KD, Magnan RE, Gerrard M, Gibbons FX. Risk perceptions: assessment and relationship to influenza vaccination. Health Psychol. 2007 Mar;26(2):146-51.
Responsible Party:
Amy McQueen,
Assistant Professor,
Washington University School of Medicine
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
NCT02485561
Other Study ID Numbers:
- HRPO201501019
- R21CA187608
First Posted:
Jun 30, 2015
Last Update Posted:
Nov 15, 2018
Last Verified:
Oct 1, 2018
Individual Participant Data (IPD) Sharing Statement:
Undecided
Plan to Share IPD:
Undecided
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product:
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product:
No
Keywords provided by Amy McQueen,
Assistant Professor,
Washington University School of Medicine
Additional relevant MeSH terms:
Study Results
Participant Flow
| Recruitment Details | We sent electronic invitations to prospective participants from two opt-in registries: 1) Washington University's Volunteer for Health Research Participant Registry and 2) ResearchMatch.org hosted by Vanderbilt University. |
|---|---|
| Pre-assignment Detail | Nearly all participants completed all study components online. They provided informed consent and proceeded to the baseline survey (n=486). Only those that completed the baseline survey were randomized (n=477) to one of three intervention conditions, so that number is smaller than the total who started the study. |
| Arm/Group Title | Information Only | Screener Narrative | Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|---|
| Arm/Group Description | INTERVENTION: Information about colon cancer and screening tests. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. | INTERVENTION: Information + Personal Narrative from someone who was screened for colon cancer Health communication intervention: This study will compare the effects of adding personal experiences with colon cancer screening to educational information to explore potential differences in reactions to different role models on individuals' screening intentions and behaviors. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. | INTERVENTION: Information + Personal Narrative from someone who was screened for, and diagnosed with, colon cancer Health communication intervention: This study will compare the effects of adding personal experiences with colon cancer screening to educational information to explore potential differences in reactions to different role models on individuals' screening intentions and behaviors. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. |
| Period Title: Overall Study | |||
| STARTED | 161 | 157 | 159 |
| Completed 1 mo Survey | 145 | 138 | 144 |
| COMPLETED | 133 | 118 | 136 |
| NOT COMPLETED | 28 | 39 | 23 |
Baseline Characteristics
| Arm/Group Title | Information Only | Screener Narrative | Survivor Narrative | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arm/Group Description | INTERVENTION: Information about colon cancer and screening tests. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. | INTERVENTION: Information + Personal Narrative from someone who was screened for colon cancer Health communication intervention: This study will compare the effects of adding personal experiences with colon cancer screening to educational information to explore potential differences in reactions to different role models on individuals' screening intentions and behaviors. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. | INTERVENTION: Information + Personal Narrative from someone who was screened for, and diagnosed with, colon cancer Health communication intervention: This study will compare the effects of adding personal experiences with colon cancer screening to educational information to explore potential differences in reactions to different role models on individuals' screening intentions and behaviors. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. | Total of all reporting groups |
| Overall Participants | 161 | 157 | 159 | 477 |
| Age (years) [Mean (Standard Deviation) ] | ||||
| Mean (Standard Deviation) [years] |
57.1
(5.8)
|
57.8
(6.6)
|
57.4
(6.2)
|
57.4
(6.2)
|
| Sex: Female, Male (Count of Participants) | ||||
| Female |
109
67.7%
|
108
68.8%
|
117
73.6%
|
334
70%
|
| Male |
52
32.3%
|
49
31.2%
|
42
26.4%
|
143
30%
|
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized (Count of Participants) | ||||
| Caucasian/White |
123
76.4%
|
126
80.3%
|
128
80.5%
|
377
79%
|
| African American/Black |
28
17.4%
|
24
15.3%
|
25
15.7%
|
77
16.1%
|
| Other race |
10
6.2%
|
7
4.5%
|
6
3.8%
|
23
4.8%
|
| Any prior colorectal cancer screening (Count of Participants) | ||||
| Count of Participants [Participants] |
45
28%
|
57
36.3%
|
51
32.1%
|
153
32.1%
|
Outcome Measures
| Title | Intentions to Get Screened for Colon Cancer |
|---|---|
| Description | Intention was measured on all surveys with the mean of 3 items assessed using slider bars (coded 1=not at all - 100=extremely) asking about the likelihood of being screened in the next 6 months, the importance of screening, and commitment to screening. Higher scores indicate greater intentions to get screened for colorectal cancer. |
| Time Frame | Immediately post-intervention |
Outcome Measure Data
| Analysis Population Description |
|---|
| Participants who completed the baseline, intervention, and immediately post-intervention survey |
| Arm/Group Title | Information Only | Screener Narrative | Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|---|
| Arm/Group Description | INTERVENTION: Information about colon cancer and screening tests. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. | INTERVENTION: Information + Personal Narrative from someone who was screened for colon cancer Health communication intervention: This study will compare the effects of adding personal experiences with colon cancer screening to educational information to explore potential differences in reactions to different role models on individuals' screening intentions and behaviors. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. | INTERVENTION: Information + Personal Narrative from someone who was screened for, and diagnosed with, colon cancer Health communication intervention: This study will compare the effects of adding personal experiences with colon cancer screening to educational information to explore potential differences in reactions to different role models on individuals' screening intentions and behaviors. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. |
| Measure Participants | 159 | 155 | 159 |
| Mean (Standard Deviation) [units on a 0-100 scale] |
68.64
(26.42)
|
65.51
(27.29)
|
64.30
(29.99)
|
Statistical Analysis 1
| Statistical Analysis Overview | Comparison Group Selection | Information Only, Screener Narrative, Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|
| Comments | ||
| Type of Statistical Test | Superiority | |
| Comments | ||
| Statistical Test of Hypothesis | p-Value | .362 |
| Comments | ||
| Method | ANOVA | |
| Comments | ||
| Method of Estimation | Estimation Parameter | F-value |
| Estimated Value | 1.019 | |
| Confidence Interval |
(2-Sided) % to |
|
| Parameter Dispersion |
Type: Value: |
|
| Estimation Comments | ||
| Title | Identification With the Character |
|---|---|
| Description | Participants assigned to narrative conditions were asked if they liked and felt similar to the character in the story they read with 3 items each with response options 1=Strongly Disagree - 5=Strongly Agree. Measures were based on previous work by the study investigators. Mean scores for liking and similarity were created; higher scores reflect higher perceived similarity and liking for the character. Means will be compared between the two groups assigned to read a narrative. |
| Time Frame | Immediately post-intervention |
Outcome Measure Data
| Analysis Population Description |
|---|
| Participants who completed baseline, intervention, and immediately post-intervention survey |
| Arm/Group Title | Information Only | Screener Narrative | Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|---|
| Arm/Group Description | INTERVENTION: Information about colon cancer and screening tests. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. | INTERVENTION: Information + Personal Narrative from someone who was screened for colon cancer Health communication intervention: This study will compare the effects of adding personal experiences with colon cancer screening to educational information to explore potential differences in reactions to different role models on individuals' screening intentions and behaviors. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. | INTERVENTION: Information + Personal Narrative from someone who was screened for, and diagnosed with, colon cancer Health communication intervention: This study will compare the effects of adding personal experiences with colon cancer screening to educational information to explore potential differences in reactions to different role models on individuals' screening intentions and behaviors. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. |
| Measure Participants | 159 | 155 | 159 |
| Perceived similarity |
NA
(NA)
|
3.69
(0.81)
|
3.47
(0.91)
|
| Liking of character |
NA
(NA)
|
3.73
(0.63)
|
3.75
(0.69)
|
Statistical Analysis 1
| Statistical Analysis Overview | Comparison Group Selection | Screener Narrative, Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|
| Comments | ||
| Type of Statistical Test | Superiority | |
| Comments | ||
| Statistical Test of Hypothesis | p-Value | .024 |
| Comments | ||
| Method | t-test, 2 sided | |
| Comments | ||
| Method of Estimation | Estimation Parameter | Mean Difference (Final Values) |
| Estimated Value | .22 | |
| Confidence Interval |
(2-Sided) % to |
|
| Parameter Dispersion |
Type: Standard Error of the Mean Value: .098 |
|
| Estimation Comments | ||
Statistical Analysis 2
| Statistical Analysis Overview | Comparison Group Selection | Screener Narrative, Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|
| Comments | ||
| Type of Statistical Test | Superiority | |
| Comments | ||
| Statistical Test of Hypothesis | p-Value | .75 |
| Comments | ||
| Method | t-test, 2 sided | |
| Comments | ||
| Method of Estimation | Estimation Parameter | Mean Difference (Final Values) |
| Estimated Value | -.024 | |
| Confidence Interval |
(2-Sided) % to |
|
| Parameter Dispersion |
Type: Standard Error of the Mean Value: .074 |
|
| Estimation Comments | ||
| Title | Three Measures of Engagement |
|---|---|
| Description | Confirmatory factor analyses did not support an aggregate measure adapted from an existing transportation scale, so a single item "What I just read affected me emotionally" was used to measure emotional engagement for all participants. For participants assigned to either narrative condition, two items reflected cognitive (imagery) engagement "While I was reading the story, I could easily picture the events in it taking place" and "I had a vivid mental image of the person in the story". Mean scores were created for cognitive engagement. Two items reflected self-referencing engagement: "I could picture myself in the scene of the events described in the story" and "The events in the story are relevant to my life" were assessed and mean scores created for self-referencing engagement. Responses for all items were 1=Not at all - 7=Very much. Higher mean scores reflected higher engagement. |
| Time Frame | Immediately post-intervention |
Outcome Measure Data
| Analysis Population Description |
|---|
| [Not Specified] |
| Arm/Group Title | Information Only | Screener Narrative | Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|---|
| Arm/Group Description | INTERVENTION: Information about colon cancer and screening tests. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. | INTERVENTION: Information + Personal Narrative from someone who was screened for colon cancer Health communication intervention: This study will compare the effects of adding personal experiences with colon cancer screening to educational information to explore potential differences in reactions to different role models on individuals' screening intentions and behaviors. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. | INTERVENTION: Information + Personal Narrative from someone who was screened for, and diagnosed with, colon cancer Health communication intervention: This study will compare the effects of adding personal experiences with colon cancer screening to educational information to explore potential differences in reactions to different role models on individuals' screening intentions and behaviors. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. |
| Measure Participants | 159 | 155 | 159 |
| Emotional engagement |
2.95
(1.86)
|
3.05
(1.80)
|
3.65
(1.94)
|
| Cognitive engagement |
NA
(NA)
|
5.45
(1.35)
|
5.47
(1.31)
|
| Self-referencing engagement |
NA
(NA)
|
5.23
(1.47)
|
4.51
(1.73)
|
Statistical Analysis 1
| Statistical Analysis Overview | Comparison Group Selection | Information Only, Screener Narrative, Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|
| Comments | ||
| Type of Statistical Test | Superiority | |
| Comments | ||
| Statistical Test of Hypothesis | p-Value | .002 |
| Comments | ||
| Method | ANOVA | |
| Comments | ||
| Method of Estimation | Estimation Parameter | F-value |
| Estimated Value | 6.482 | |
| Confidence Interval |
(2-Sided) % to |
|
| Parameter Dispersion |
Type: Value: |
|
| Estimation Comments | ||
Statistical Analysis 2
| Statistical Analysis Overview | Comparison Group Selection | Screener Narrative, Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|
| Comments | ||
| Type of Statistical Test | Superiority | |
| Comments | ||
| Statistical Test of Hypothesis | p-Value | .91 |
| Comments | ||
| Method | t-test, 2 sided | |
| Comments | ||
| Method of Estimation | Estimation Parameter | Mean Difference (Final Values) |
| Estimated Value | -.02 | |
| Confidence Interval |
(2-Sided) % to |
|
| Parameter Dispersion |
Type: Standard Error of the Mean Value: .15 |
|
| Estimation Comments | ||
Statistical Analysis 3
| Statistical Analysis Overview | Comparison Group Selection | Screener Narrative, Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|
| Comments | ||
| Type of Statistical Test | Superiority | |
| Comments | ||
| Statistical Test of Hypothesis | p-Value | <.001 |
| Comments | ||
| Method | t-test, 2 sided | |
| Comments | ||
| Method of Estimation | Estimation Parameter | Mean Difference (Final Values) |
| Estimated Value | .716 | |
| Confidence Interval |
(2-Sided) % to |
|
| Parameter Dispersion |
Type: Standard Error of the Mean Value: .182 |
|
| Estimation Comments | ||
| Title | Self-efficacy for Getting Screened for Colon Cancer |
|---|---|
| Description | Six items assess confidence in getting screened for colon cancer despite common barriers. Mean scores are created from response options that range from 1=not at all confident to 7=very confident. Higher scores reflect greater confidence in getting colorectal cancer screening. Means will be compared between all three study groups. |
| Time Frame | Immediately post-intervention |
Outcome Measure Data
| Analysis Population Description |
|---|
| Participants who completed the baseline survey, intervention, and immediate post-intervention survey |
| Arm/Group Title | Information Only | Screener Narrative | Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|---|
| Arm/Group Description | INTERVENTION: Information about colon cancer and screening tests. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. | INTERVENTION: Information + Personal Narrative from someone who was screened for colon cancer Health communication intervention: This study will compare the effects of adding personal experiences with colon cancer screening to educational information to explore potential differences in reactions to different role models on individuals' screening intentions and behaviors. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. | INTERVENTION: Information + Personal Narrative from someone who was screened for, and diagnosed with, colon cancer Health communication intervention: This study will compare the effects of adding personal experiences with colon cancer screening to educational information to explore potential differences in reactions to different role models on individuals' screening intentions and behaviors. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. |
| Measure Participants | 159 | 155 | 159 |
| Mean (Standard Deviation) [units on a 7-point response scale] |
5.80
(1.36)
|
5.81
(1.34)
|
5.66
(1.33)
|
Statistical Analysis 1
| Statistical Analysis Overview | Comparison Group Selection | Information Only, Screener Narrative, Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|
| Comments | ||
| Type of Statistical Test | Superiority | |
| Comments | ||
| Statistical Test of Hypothesis | p-Value | 0.55 |
| Comments | ||
| Method | ANOVA | |
| Comments | ||
| Method of Estimation | Estimation Parameter | F-value |
| Estimated Value | .608 | |
| Confidence Interval |
(2-Sided) % to |
|
| Parameter Dispersion |
Type: Value: |
|
| Estimation Comments | ||
| Title | Affect |
|---|---|
| Description | Using the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule, we assessed the strength of 5 positive (happy, proud, strong, inspired, hopeful) and 5 negative (angry, guilty, sad, nervous, afraid) emotions felt during the assigned reading (1=Not at all - 7=Extremely). Higher mean subscale scores reflect stronger positive and negative emotions. Means will be compared between all three study groups. |
| Time Frame | Immediately post-intervention |
Outcome Measure Data
| Analysis Population Description |
|---|
| Participants who completed the baseline survey, intervention, and immediate post-intervention survey |
| Arm/Group Title | Information Only | Screener Narrative | Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|---|
| Arm/Group Description | INTERVENTION: Information about colon cancer and screening tests. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. | INTERVENTION: Information + Personal Narrative from someone who was screened for colon cancer Health communication intervention: This study will compare the effects of adding personal experiences with colon cancer screening to educational information to explore potential differences in reactions to different role models on individuals' screening intentions and behaviors. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. | INTERVENTION: Information + Personal Narrative from someone who was screened for, and diagnosed with, colon cancer Health communication intervention: This study will compare the effects of adding personal experiences with colon cancer screening to educational information to explore potential differences in reactions to different role models on individuals' screening intentions and behaviors. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. |
| Measure Participants | 159 | 155 | 159 |
| Positive affect |
2.88
(1.58)
|
3.22
(1.57)
|
3.09
(1.47)
|
| Negative affect |
2.45
(1.34)
|
2.07
(1.10)
|
2.91
(1.41)
|
Statistical Analysis 1
| Statistical Analysis Overview | Comparison Group Selection | Information Only, Screener Narrative, Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|
| Comments | ||
| Type of Statistical Test | Superiority | |
| Comments | ||
| Statistical Test of Hypothesis | p-Value | <.001 |
| Comments | ||
| Method | ANOVA | |
| Comments | ||
| Method of Estimation | Estimation Parameter | F-value |
| Estimated Value | 16.31 | |
| Confidence Interval |
(2-Sided) % to |
|
| Parameter Dispersion |
Type: Value: |
|
| Estimation Comments | ||
Statistical Analysis 2
| Statistical Analysis Overview | Comparison Group Selection | Information Only, Screener Narrative, Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|
| Comments | ||
| Type of Statistical Test | Superiority | |
| Comments | ||
| Statistical Test of Hypothesis | p-Value | 0.14 |
| Comments | ||
| Method | ANOVA | |
| Comments | ||
| Method of Estimation | Estimation Parameter | F-value |
| Estimated Value | 2.00 | |
| Confidence Interval |
(2-Sided) % to |
|
| Parameter Dispersion |
Type: Value: |
|
| Estimation Comments | ||
| Title | Defensive Information Processing |
|---|---|
| Description | Seven scales assessing defensive information processing will be assessed using previously validated measures for opt-out behavior (3 items), opt-out information (1 item), blunting (2 items), self-exemption (5 items), deny immediacy (3 items), counterarguing (4 items), and minimize the harm (2 items). Response options range from 1=strongly disagree to 7=strongly agree. Mean scores are created for each scale and higher scores reflect greater defensive information processing. Means will be compared between all three study groups. |
| Time Frame | Immediately post-intervention |
Outcome Measure Data
| Analysis Population Description |
|---|
| Participants who completed the baseline survey, intervention, and immediate post-intervention survey |
| Arm/Group Title | Information Only | Screener Narrative | Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|---|
| Arm/Group Description | INTERVENTION: Information about colon cancer and screening tests. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. | INTERVENTION: Information + Personal Narrative from someone who was screened for colon cancer Health communication intervention: This study will compare the effects of adding personal experiences with colon cancer screening to educational information to explore potential differences in reactions to different role models on individuals' screening intentions and behaviors. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. | INTERVENTION: Information + Personal Narrative from someone who was screened for, and diagnosed with, colon cancer Health communication intervention: This study will compare the effects of adding personal experiences with colon cancer screening to educational information to explore potential differences in reactions to different role models on individuals' screening intentions and behaviors. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. |
| Measure Participants | 159 | 155 | 159 |
| Opt-out information |
2.79
(1.85)
|
2.54
(1.68)
|
2.90
(1.77)
|
| Opt-out behavior |
3.72
(1.75)
|
3.69
(1.82)
|
3.68
(1.85)
|
| Blunting |
3.75
(1.79)
|
3.63
(1.68)
|
3.78
(1.76)
|
| Self-exemption |
3.15
(1.75)
|
3.30
(1.83)
|
3.06
(1.77)
|
| Suppression |
2.97
(1.27)
|
3.10
(1.33)
|
2.83
(1.23)
|
| Counterarguing |
2.17
(1.13)
|
2.31
(1.26)
|
2.30
(1.36)
|
| Normalize the risk |
2.89
(1.39)
|
2.87
(1.44)
|
3.05
(1.55)
|
Statistical Analysis 1
| Statistical Analysis Overview | Comparison Group Selection | Information Only, Screener Narrative, Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|
| Comments | ||
| Type of Statistical Test | Superiority | |
| Comments | ||
| Statistical Test of Hypothesis | p-Value | .19 |
| Comments | ||
| Method | ANOVA | |
| Comments | ||
| Method of Estimation | Estimation Parameter | F-value |
| Estimated Value | 1.68 | |
| Confidence Interval |
(2-Sided) % to |
|
| Parameter Dispersion |
Type: Value: |
|
| Estimation Comments | ||
Statistical Analysis 2
| Statistical Analysis Overview | Comparison Group Selection | Information Only, Screener Narrative, Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|
| Comments | ||
| Type of Statistical Test | Superiority | |
| Comments | ||
| Statistical Test of Hypothesis | p-Value | .98 |
| Comments | ||
| Method | ANOVA | |
| Comments | ||
| Method of Estimation | Estimation Parameter | F-value |
| Estimated Value | .021 | |
| Confidence Interval |
(2-Sided) % to |
|
| Parameter Dispersion |
Type: Value: |
|
| Estimation Comments | ||
Statistical Analysis 3
| Statistical Analysis Overview | Comparison Group Selection | Information Only, Screener Narrative, Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|
| Comments | ||
| Type of Statistical Test | Superiority | |
| Comments | ||
| Statistical Test of Hypothesis | p-Value | .73 |
| Comments | ||
| Method | ANOVA | |
| Comments | ||
| Method of Estimation | Estimation Parameter | F-value |
| Estimated Value | .312 | |
| Confidence Interval |
(2-Sided) % to |
|
| Parameter Dispersion |
Type: Value: |
|
| Estimation Comments | ||
Statistical Analysis 4
| Statistical Analysis Overview | Comparison Group Selection | Information Only, Screener Narrative, Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|
| Comments | ||
| Type of Statistical Test | Superiority | |
| Comments | ||
| Statistical Test of Hypothesis | p-Value | .496 |
| Comments | ||
| Method | ANOVA | |
| Comments | ||
| Method of Estimation | Estimation Parameter | F-value |
| Estimated Value | .702 | |
| Confidence Interval |
(2-Sided) % to |
|
| Parameter Dispersion |
Type: Value: |
|
| Estimation Comments | ||
Statistical Analysis 5
| Statistical Analysis Overview | Comparison Group Selection | Information Only, Screener Narrative, Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|
| Comments | ||
| Type of Statistical Test | Superiority | |
| Comments | ||
| Statistical Test of Hypothesis | p-Value | .154 |
| Comments | ||
| Method | ANOVA | |
| Comments | ||
| Method of Estimation | Estimation Parameter | F-value |
| Estimated Value | 1.88 | |
| Confidence Interval |
(2-Sided) % to |
|
| Parameter Dispersion |
Type: Value: |
|
| Estimation Comments | ||
Statistical Analysis 6
| Statistical Analysis Overview | Comparison Group Selection | Information Only, Screener Narrative, Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|
| Comments | ||
| Type of Statistical Test | Superiority | |
| Comments | ||
| Statistical Test of Hypothesis | p-Value | .514 |
| Comments | ||
| Method | ANOVA | |
| Comments | ||
| Method of Estimation | Estimation Parameter | F-value |
| Estimated Value | .667 | |
| Confidence Interval |
(2-Sided) % to |
|
| Parameter Dispersion |
Type: Value: |
|
| Estimation Comments | ||
Statistical Analysis 7
| Statistical Analysis Overview | Comparison Group Selection | Information Only, Screener Narrative, Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|
| Comments | ||
| Type of Statistical Test | Superiority | |
| Comments | ||
| Statistical Test of Hypothesis | p-Value | .514 |
| Comments | ||
| Method | ANOVA | |
| Comments | ||
| Method of Estimation | Estimation Parameter | F-value |
| Estimated Value | .666 | |
| Confidence Interval |
(2-Sided) % to |
|
| Parameter Dispersion |
Type: Value: |
|
| Estimation Comments | ||
| Title | Absolute Perceived Susceptibility to Colon Cancer |
|---|---|
| Description | Absolute perceived risk was assessed with three items: I am at risk for developing colorectal cancer, If I do not get screened regularly, I would feel vulnerable to developing colorectal cancer, If I do not get screened regularly, it is likely that I will develop colorectal cancer. Response options range from 1=strongly disagree to 5=strongly agree. Mean scale scores were created and higher scores reflect greater perceived susceptibility to colorectal cancer. Mean scores will be compared between all three study groups. |
| Time Frame | Immediately post-intervention |
Outcome Measure Data
| Analysis Population Description |
|---|
| Participants who completed the baseline survey, intervention, and immediate post-intervention survey |
| Arm/Group Title | Information Only | Screener Narrative | Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|---|
| Arm/Group Description | INTERVENTION: Information about colon cancer and screening tests. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. | INTERVENTION: Information + Personal Narrative from someone who was screened for colon cancer Health communication intervention: This study will compare the effects of adding personal experiences with colon cancer screening to educational information to explore potential differences in reactions to different role models on individuals' screening intentions and behaviors. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. | INTERVENTION: Information + Personal Narrative from someone who was screened for, and diagnosed with, colon cancer Health communication intervention: This study will compare the effects of adding personal experiences with colon cancer screening to educational information to explore potential differences in reactions to different role models on individuals' screening intentions and behaviors. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. |
| Measure Participants | 159 | 155 | 159 |
| Mean (Standard Deviation) [units on a 5-point response scale] |
2.98
(0.76)
|
3.03
(0.72)
|
3.08
(0.78)
|
Statistical Analysis 1
| Statistical Analysis Overview | Comparison Group Selection | Information Only, Screener Narrative, Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|
| Comments | ||
| Type of Statistical Test | Superiority | |
| Comments | ||
| Statistical Test of Hypothesis | p-Value | .56 |
| Comments | ||
| Method | ANOVA | |
| Comments | ||
| Method of Estimation | Estimation Parameter | F-value |
| Estimated Value | .59 | |
| Confidence Interval |
(2-Sided) % to |
|
| Parameter Dispersion |
Type: Value: |
|
| Estimation Comments | ||
| Title | Social Influence |
|---|---|
| Description | Social influence will be assessed with three items developed for this study based on standard measures that include physician, family, and friends as important social referents encouraging colorectal cancer screening. Response options range from 1=strongly disagree to 7=strongly agree. Mean scores were created and higher scores reflect greater perceived social influence for getting screened for colorectal cancer. Means will be compared between all three study groups. |
| Time Frame | Immediately post-intervention |
Outcome Measure Data
| Analysis Population Description |
|---|
| Participants who completed the baseline survey, intervention, and immediate post-intervention survey |
| Arm/Group Title | Information Only | Screener Narrative | Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|---|
| Arm/Group Description | INTERVENTION: Information about colon cancer and screening tests. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. | INTERVENTION: Information + Personal Narrative from someone who was screened for colon cancer Health communication intervention: This study will compare the effects of adding personal experiences with colon cancer screening to educational information to explore potential differences in reactions to different role models on individuals' screening intentions and behaviors. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. | INTERVENTION: Information + Personal Narrative from someone who was screened for, and diagnosed with, colon cancer Health communication intervention: This study will compare the effects of adding personal experiences with colon cancer screening to educational information to explore potential differences in reactions to different role models on individuals' screening intentions and behaviors. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. |
| Measure Participants | 159 | 155 | 159 |
| Mean (Standard Deviation) [units on a scale] |
5.34
(1.33)
|
5.40
(1.24)
|
5.32
(1.19)
|
Statistical Analysis 1
| Statistical Analysis Overview | Comparison Group Selection | Information Only, Screener Narrative, Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|
| Comments | ||
| Type of Statistical Test | Superiority | |
| Comments | ||
| Statistical Test of Hypothesis | p-Value | .84 |
| Comments | ||
| Method | ANOVA | |
| Comments | ||
| Method of Estimation | Estimation Parameter | F-value |
| Estimated Value | .18 | |
| Confidence Interval |
(2-Sided) % to |
|
| Parameter Dispersion |
Type: Value: |
|
| Estimation Comments | ||
| Title | Worry |
|---|---|
| Description | Worry was assessed with four items regarding worry about getting colorectal cancer, having a test that shows they have colorectal cancer, concern that colorectal cancer screening will be physically uncomfortable, and concern that there could be complications from the test. Response options ranged from 1=strongly disagree to 5=strongly agree. Mean scores were created (Range 1-5); higher scores reflect greater worry. Means will be compared between all three study groups. |
| Time Frame | Immediately post-intervention |
Outcome Measure Data
| Analysis Population Description |
|---|
| Participants who completed the baseline survey, intervention, and immediate post-intervention survey |
| Arm/Group Title | Information Only | Screener Narrative | Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|---|
| Arm/Group Description | INTERVENTION: Information about colon cancer and screening tests. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. | INTERVENTION: Information + Personal Narrative from someone who was screened for colon cancer Health communication intervention: This study will compare the effects of adding personal experiences with colon cancer screening to educational information to explore potential differences in reactions to different role models on individuals' screening intentions and behaviors. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. | INTERVENTION: Information + Personal Narrative from someone who was screened for, and diagnosed with, colon cancer Health communication intervention: This study will compare the effects of adding personal experiences with colon cancer screening to educational information to explore potential differences in reactions to different role models on individuals' screening intentions and behaviors. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. |
| Measure Participants | 159 | 155 | 159 |
| Mean (Standard Deviation) [units on a scale] |
2.62
(0.99)
|
2.66
(0.82)
|
2.78
(1.01)
|
Statistical Analysis 1
| Statistical Analysis Overview | Comparison Group Selection | Information Only, Screener Narrative, Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|
| Comments | ||
| Type of Statistical Test | Superiority | |
| Comments | ||
| Statistical Test of Hypothesis | p-Value | .31 |
| Comments | ||
| Method | ANOVA | |
| Comments | ||
| Method of Estimation | Estimation Parameter | F-value |
| Estimated Value | 1.16 | |
| Confidence Interval |
(2-Sided) % to |
|
| Parameter Dispersion |
Type: Value: |
|
| Estimation Comments | ||
| Title | Perceived Benefits and Barriers of Colorectal Cancer Screening |
|---|---|
| Description | Perceived colorectal cancer screening benefits (8 items) barriers (6 items) are assessed with items from previously validated scales. Response options range from 1=strongly disagree to 7=strongly agree. Mean scores were created for each scale; higher scores reflect greater perceived benefits and barriers of getting screened. Means will be compared between all three study groups. |
| Time Frame | Immediately post-intervention |
Outcome Measure Data
| Analysis Population Description |
|---|
| Participants who completed the baseline survey, intervention, and immediate post-intervention survey |
| Arm/Group Title | Information Only | Screener Narrative | Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|---|
| Arm/Group Description | INTERVENTION: Information about colon cancer and screening tests. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. | INTERVENTION: Information + Personal Narrative from someone who was screened for colon cancer Health communication intervention: This study will compare the effects of adding personal experiences with colon cancer screening to educational information to explore potential differences in reactions to different role models on individuals' screening intentions and behaviors. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. | INTERVENTION: Information + Personal Narrative from someone who was screened for, and diagnosed with, colon cancer Health communication intervention: This study will compare the effects of adding personal experiences with colon cancer screening to educational information to explore potential differences in reactions to different role models on individuals' screening intentions and behaviors. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. |
| Measure Participants | 159 | 155 | 159 |
| Perceived benefits |
5.98
(0.92)
|
6.08
(0.93)
|
5.92
(1.00)
|
| Perceived barriers |
3.15
(1.34)
|
3.15
(1.29)
|
3.10
(1.34)
|
Statistical Analysis 1
| Statistical Analysis Overview | Comparison Group Selection | Information Only, Screener Narrative, Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|
| Comments | ||
| Type of Statistical Test | Superiority | |
| Comments | ||
| Statistical Test of Hypothesis | p-Value | .31 |
| Comments | ||
| Method | ANOVA | |
| Comments | ||
| Method of Estimation | Estimation Parameter | F-value |
| Estimated Value | 1.17 | |
| Confidence Interval |
(2-Sided) % to |
|
| Parameter Dispersion |
Type: Value: |
|
| Estimation Comments | ||
Statistical Analysis 2
| Statistical Analysis Overview | Comparison Group Selection | Information Only, Screener Narrative, Survivor Narrative |
|---|---|---|
| Comments | ||
| Type of Statistical Test | Superiority | |
| Comments | ||
| Statistical Test of Hypothesis | p-Value | .95 |
| Comments | ||
| Method | ANOVA | |
| Comments | ||
| Method of Estimation | Estimation Parameter | F-value |
| Estimated Value | 0.056 | |
| Confidence Interval |
(2-Sided) % to |
|
| Parameter Dispersion |
Type: Value: |
|
| Estimation Comments | ||
Adverse Events
| Time Frame | Participants were engaged in the study for approximately 12 months from baseline to final follow up survey. | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adverse Event Reporting Description | The only foreseeable adverse events that could arise from participation in the online study included negative affect including cancer worry as a result of reading about colorectal cancer risk, or a breach of confidentiality by researchers or hackers. | |||||
| Arm/Group Title | Information Only | Screener Narrative | Survivor Narrative | |||
| Arm/Group Description | INTERVENTION: Information about colon cancer and screening tests. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. | INTERVENTION: Information + Personal Narrative from someone who was screened for colon cancer Health communication intervention: This study will compare the effects of adding personal experiences with colon cancer screening to educational information to explore potential differences in reactions to different role models on individuals' screening intentions and behaviors. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. | INTERVENTION: Information + Personal Narrative from someone who was screened for, and diagnosed with, colon cancer Health communication intervention: This study will compare the effects of adding personal experiences with colon cancer screening to educational information to explore potential differences in reactions to different role models on individuals' screening intentions and behaviors. Education information: Typical materials are used to present educational information to participants about colon cancer and screening tests. | |||
All Cause Mortality |
||||||
| Information Only | Screener Narrative | Survivor Narrative | ||||
| Affected / at Risk (%) | # Events | Affected / at Risk (%) | # Events | Affected / at Risk (%) | # Events | |
| Total | 0/159 (0%) | 0/155 (0%) | 0/159 (0%) | |||
Serious Adverse Events |
||||||
| Information Only | Screener Narrative | Survivor Narrative | ||||
| Affected / at Risk (%) | # Events | Affected / at Risk (%) | # Events | Affected / at Risk (%) | # Events | |
| Total | 0/159 (0%) | 0/155 (0%) | 0/159 (0%) | |||
Other (Not Including Serious) Adverse Events |
||||||
| Information Only | Screener Narrative | Survivor Narrative | ||||
| Affected / at Risk (%) | # Events | Affected / at Risk (%) | # Events | Affected / at Risk (%) | # Events | |
| Total | 0/159 (0%) | 0/155 (0%) | 0/159 (0%) | |||
Limitations/Caveats
[Not Specified]
More Information
Certain Agreements
Principal Investigators are NOT employed by the organization sponsoring the study.
There is NOT an agreement between Principal Investigators and the Sponsor (or its agents) that restricts the PI's rights to discuss or publish trial results after the trial is completed.
Results Point of Contact
| Name/Title | Amy McQueen |
|---|---|
| Organization | Washington University in St. Louis |
| Phone | 3142862016 |
| amcqueen@wustl.edu |
Responsible Party:
Amy McQueen,
Assistant Professor,
Washington University School of Medicine
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
NCT02485561
Other Study ID Numbers:
- HRPO201501019
- R21CA187608
First Posted:
Jun 30, 2015
Last Update Posted:
Nov 15, 2018
Last Verified:
Oct 1, 2018