22 Clinical Trials for Various Conditions
The goal of this clinical trial is to learn if the online, simulated human "Talk to Nathan About Prostate Cancer Screening" decision aid (https://www.cdc.gov/prostate-cancer/talk-to-nathan/index.html) is effective in helping patients decide about prostate cancer screening. The main questions it aims to answer are: * Is using the "Talk to Nathan About Prostate Cancer Screening" decision aid effective in improving knowledge, overcoming health literacy barriers, and resolving decisional conflict compared to a standard decision aid or standard education materials? * What are the barriers and best practices for incorporating Talk to Nathan About Prostate Cancer Screening into the flow of primary care practice? Researchers will compare "Talk to Nathan About Prostate Cancer Screening" to a standard decision aid and to standard prostate cancer screening education materials to test the effectiveness of using "Talk to Nathan About Prostate Cancer Screening." Participants will: * Use "Talk to Nathan About Prostate Cancer Screening," use a standard decision aid, or use standard education materials about prostate cancer screening * Visit the primary care clinic for follow-up * Complete surveys as part of the clinical trial
Participants will be recruited from the United States and Australia to take an online survey about colon cancer screening or prostate cancer screening. Individuals selected for both the prostate cancer survey and the colon cancer study will be randomized to take one of three survey types - balance sheet, rating and ranking or conjoint analysis. These surveys will help participants clarify their values and opinions about screening options for colon cancer or prostate cancer. Participants' responses to the online survey are measured at one point in time - the time at which the participant takes the survey.
This study evaluates the efficacy of a tailored telephone intervention to promote informed decision making about prostate cancer testing among predominantly immigrant black men.
The primary goal of this study is to develop and evaluate a print-based method of patient education with a decision tool that is designed to provide detailed information about prostate cancer and to clarify patient preferences and values, ultimately assisting men in making an informed screening decision.
Interventions to Improve Shared Decision-Making: Prostate Cancer Screening is a prospective study of educational interventions to improve the interaction of physicians and their patients about prostate cancer screening. Educational material is provided in primary care practices using either standard paper information or a novel web-based interactive curriculum that explores the risks and benefits of screening measures for prostate cancer for older men. The impact of the intervention on shared decision-making with both actual and standardized patients will be assessed.
Due to the disputed efficacy of prostate cancer (CaP) screening and treatment, most authorities recommend that providers inform and involve patients in CaP screening decisions.
This behavioral clinical trial assesses the efficacy of a educational intervention to increase shared decision making about prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening for prostate cancer among African American males. Half of participants will receive a multimedia educational intervention, while the other half will receive usual care.
The purpose of this study is to evaluate a new counseling tool for patients deciding whether or not to undergo prostate cancer screening. This screening decision aid is a computer program that provides individual patients estimates of their risks of prostate cancer diagnosis, prostate cancer related death, or death from any cause. The researchers are evaluating whether or not patients find this screening decision aid helpful. As part of this study, participants will be asked for their response on questionnaires. If patients find the screening decision aid helpful, the researchers will make it available at other clinic locations.
Decision-aids are tools to educate patients on a given topic so that they may better participate in shared-decision making in their health care. Given the complexities associated with PSA testing, many professional organizations have advocated for shared-decision making for PSA testing. However, no consensus exists as to how best educate and involve patients in the shared-decision making process. The goal of this study is to evaluate a pilot program utilizing a simple PSA screening decision-aid presented in two different fashions in a primary care clinic with a large fraction of African-American patients. The investigators will evaluate the effectiveness of this program to educate patients on the risks and benefits of prostate specific antigen (PSA) testing, on their subsequent level of comfort with their decision about whether to receive PSA testing, and on the comfort level of physicians on their patient's decisions regarding PSA testing, and importantly, how well these strategies can be implemented into the daily work-flow of a clinic. If successful, this program may serve as a model for the broader implementation of such strategies across Minnesota and the country.
The purpose of this study is to determine whether an intervention designed to help men share decisions about prostate cancer screening with their physician results in better decision making, more shared decisions, and changes in intended and actual screening rates.
The purpose of this study is to develop and evaluate a computer-based decision aid (DA) for use by men considering prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening for prostate cancer. Major medical organizations recommend that men discuss the risks and benefits of this test with their physician before making the decision. This educational, interactive DA will help them prepare for that discussion.
The purpose of this retrospective observational study is to evaluate the performance of the Shared Decision Making Process scale in a sample of patients who have received a decision aid about the decision to screen or not screen for breast cancer, colon cancer, prostate cancer, or lung cancer.
The study team created a tool to help identify patients who may benefit from shared decision making in the primary care setting. This tool is a guide to aid in decision making for prostate cancer screening. The team proposes the topics to be discussed in the screening conversation include the risk for developing prostate cancer based upon age, race/ethnicity, family history of prostate cancer, history of previous digital rectal exam, and history of previous prostate specific antigen (PSA) as well as self-reported health status and preferences for treatment. The team now proposes 1) testing this tool first for ease of use in primary care clinics 2) revising this tool based upon feedback from patients and providers, then 3) testing this tool for effectiveness in improving patient knowledge that they have an option to be screened for prostate cancer and of specific factors to be considered in the screening decision.
This clinical trial studies an informed decision making intervention of screening for prostate cancer in predominantly African American participants. It also evaluates participants' knowledge about prostate cancer screening and to improve understanding. Using decision aids such as culturally sensitive written material, verbal information, and videos to educate patients about screening may increase patient participation and knowledge. This may increase confidence in participants' decisions. Raising awareness about prostate cancer in the communities may increase the participants' willingness to be screened for prostate cancer once they have learned about it.
Objectives: The primary objective of this project is to develop and evaluate a Spanish-language slide set for administration in group settings, adapted from the content of the current guidelines and existing, self-administered ACS early detection decision aid. A guide for educators will accompany the slide set so that materials may be distributed on a broad scale at the completion of the project. It is expected that these products will be made available to community-based educators and screening programs to be used in support of an IDM process for early detection of prostate cancer with Spanish-speaking men. Specific Aims: To conduct an extensive review of the literature and other resources to identify themes related to early detection, concerns and beliefs about prostate cancer in Hispanic men. Findings will be used to adapt the slideset. To cognitive test the Spanish-language decision aid slide set with Hispanic men To conduct focus groups to evaluate the acceptability of the adapted slide set with Spanish-speaking Hispanic men who are candidates for prostate cancer screening. Participants will be tested for their knowledge of prostate cancer and acceptability of materials (e.g. length, clarity, amount and balance of information provided).
Researchers in this study will determine whether providing decision support interventions (DESIs) to men with low risk prostate cancer improves their decision-specific knowledge and alters their treatment decisions.
In this study we will compare 3 strategies for systematic delivery of prostate cancer screening decision support interventions (DESI) to usual care and examine their impact on screening decisions and subsequent healthcare utilization using a randomized control design. We hypothesize men who are given the opportunity to review a DESI by one of the 3 strategies will be less likely to opt for prostate cancer screening, and will have lower subsequent healthcare utilization than men in the control group.
The study populations consist of a sample of the patient population (men aged 40-79 years) of a large, group model HMO and a community sample of men age 50-79. Follow-up interviews of men randomly assigned to the intervention and control groups are being conducted by telephone to assess issues related to prostate cancer screening and the men's use of the CD-Rom educational intervention.
This is a multicenter study that involves research on screening for prostate cancer. This study pilot tests a culturally appropriate decision aid (DA) for African American (AA) men that will empower them to take part in decision-making regarding prostate cancer screening (PCS). The Prostate Cancer Screening Preparation (PCSPrep) tool was designed with intend to be delivered in primary care settings with attention to patient/provider interaction. Funding for this study comes from the National Institute of Health/National Cancer Institute (1R21CA178296).
The project will investigate the efficacy of a Veteran-peer-navigator-led decision coaching (PDC) program to promote Shared Decision Making (SDM) for prostate cancer screening among Veterans at the Veterans Health Administration (VA). Prostate cancer is commonly screen detected using PSA, a non-specific test which has led to modest population-level survival benefits at the cost of over-detection of low-risk disease. This trade off in outcomes is ideally addressed using SDM which can be challenging to implement in time constrained primary care office visits. The investigators propose the evaluation of a PDC intervention to promote SDM for PSA screening to improve both access and quality of care for Veterans. The investigators results will enhance understanding of the efficacy, cost-effectiveness, and sustainability of PDC interventions for SDM promotion across communication formats in the VA. Lessons learned through this proposal will not only improve quality of care for PSA screening but also will suggest a paradigm for dissemination of SDM across preventive services.
The purpose of this intervention trial is aiming to increase inform decision- making in Latino men regarding prostate cancer screening. The investigators propose to find out how much Latino men know about the benefits and risks of prostate cancer screening and what factors influence how they decide whether or not to have screening. The investigators are also interested in learning how providing education information, both verbally and in print, about the risks and benefits of prostate cancer screening affects men's interest and knowledge. The intervention is an interactive multi-media presentation made up of a small group of 8-10 Latino men gathered to discuss about prostate cancer, screening methods, treatment, and the controversy within the medical community regarding PSA screening. A facilitator guides the 1-hour discussion and encourages participant interaction. The effect of this intervention was tested on 1000 Latino men within Los Angeles county. Participants were recruited from 38 community venues (churches, community center, etc.). All participants were interviewed before being randomized to receive written (control group) or oral (intervention) prostate cancer education material. All of the participants will be followed up at 6-months via a telephone interview. The investigators hypothesize that the intervention group will have an increase knowledge of prostate cancer, will have increase communication with family, friends, and medical provider, and will have an increase rate of PSA screening compared to the control group.
The study hypothesis is that clearer visual presentation of guideline recommendations and educational outreach, or academic detailing, can improve guideline compliance. However, it will investigate other aspects of screening-related decision-making, such as provider and patient beliefs about screening, provider-patient communication and patient's willingness to forgo expected testing. The research question is whether educational interventions can decrease non-compliance with screening guidelines for 5 common cancers.