Traditional Print Communication Methods, Simple Electronic Communication Methods, or Usual Care in Increasing How Often Older Women Undergo Colorectal Cancer Screening
|No phase specified||Behavioral study, Health services research, Screening||Active||50 and over||NCI||FCCC-05016|
05-016, FCCC-IRB-05-016, NCT00459030
- 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.
- At average risk for colorectal cancer (CRC) as defined by the following criteria:
- Asymptomatic without a personal history of colorectal polyps or cancer
- No inflammatory bowel disease
- No family history of familial adenomatous polyposis or hereditary nonpolyposis CRC
- No CRC in more than one first-degree relative
- Nonadherent with standard CRC screening recommendations at the time of index OB/Gyn appointment
- Not specified
- Email accessible at home and/or work
- Able to communicate with ease in English
A total of 5,000 participants will be accrued for this study.
Comparison of traditional print versus simple electronic communication versus usual care in terms of increasing colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates
Moderating role of attentional style and background variables on the impact of the interventions
Mediating effect of potential cognitive-affective factors related to CRC screening
Cost-effectiveness of interventions
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.
Trial Lead Organizations
Fox Chase Cancer Center - Philadelphia
|David Weinberg, MD, MSC, Protocol chair|
|Fox Chase Cancer Center - Philadelphia|
|Clinical Trials Office - Fox Chase Cancer Center - Philadelphia|
|Official Title||Two Delivery Channels to Improve CRC Screening|
|Trial Start Date||2005-10-10|
|Trial Completion Date||2010-10-10 (estimated)|
|Registered in ClinicalTrials.gov||NCT00459030|
|Date Submitted to PDQ||2007-03-01|
|Information Last Verified||2009-06-07|
|NCI Grant/Contract Number||CA06927, CA102695|
Note: The purpose of most clinical trials listed in this database is to test new cancer treatments, or new methods of diagnosing, screening, or preventing cancer. Because all potentially harmful side effects are not known before a trial is conducted, dose and schedule modifications may be required for participants if they develop side effects from the treatment or test. The therapy or test described in this clinical trial is intended for use by clinical oncologists in carefully structured settings, and may not prove to be more effective than standard treatment. A responsible investigator associated with this clinical trial should be consulted before using this protocol.