Literature DB >> 16377602

The efficacy of tailored print materials in promoting colorectal cancer screening: results from a randomized trial involving callers to the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Information Service.

Alfred C Marcus1, Mondi Mason, Pam Wolfe, Barbara K Rimer, Isaac Lipkus, Victor Strecher, Richard Warneke, Marion E Morra, Amy Reasinger Allen, Sharon W Davis, Amy Gaier, Carlan Graves, Karen Julesberg, Lynne Nguyen, Rosemarie Perocchia, Jo Beth Speyer, Doug Wagner, Chris Thomsen, Mary Anne Bright.   

Abstract

In this large randomized trial among callers to the Cancer Information Service (CIS), tailored print materials were tested for efficacy in promoting colorectal cancer (CRC) screening (fecal occult blood test [FOBT], flexible sigmoidoscopy, or colonoscopy). All participants completed baseline interviews at the end of their usual service calls to the CIS, as well as short-term (6-month) and longer-term (14-month) telephone follow-up interviews. The study sample (n = 4,014) was restricted to English-speaking CIS callers 50 + years of age, who would be eligible for CRC screening at 14 months follow-up and did not call the CIS about CRC or CRC screening. Four experimental conditions were compared: a single untailored (SU) mailout of print material (the control condition); a single tailored (ST) mailout of print material; four (multiple) tailored (MT) mailouts of print materials spanning 12 months, all of which were tailored to information obtained at baseline; and four (multiple) retailored (MRT) mailouts also spanning 12 months, with retailoring of the print materials (mailouts 2, 3, and 4) based on updated information obtained from the 6-month follow-up interviews. Consistent with the main hypothesis of this trial, a significant linear trend across the SU, ST, MT, and MRT groups was found at 14 months (42%, 44%, 51%, and 48%, respectively, p = 0.05). Only for MT was there a significant difference compared with SU (p = 0.03) for the sample as a whole, while no differences were found for MT vs. MRT at 14 months. Significant moderator effects in the predicted direction were found among females, younger participants, and among those with a history of CRC screening, all of which involved the SU vs. MT MRT comparisons. Only among younger participants (ages 50-59) was there a difference between SU vs. ST at 14 months. Given these results, we conclude from this trial the following: (1) the MRT intervention failed to show added benefit beyond the MT intervention, (2) the significant intervention effects involving the MT and MRT conditions can be explained by tailoring and/or the longitudinal nature of both interventions, and (3) the most compelling evidence in support of tailoring was found for the ST condition among younger participants, where a significant need for interventions exists at the national level. Directions for future research are discussed in light of the results summarized above.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16377602     DOI: 10.1080/10810730500257754

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Health Commun        ISSN: 1081-0730


  40 in total

1.  A randomized controlled trial of a tailored interactive computer-delivered intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening: sometimes more is just the same.

Authors:  Sally W Vernon; Leona K Bartholomew; Amy McQueen; Judy L Bettencourt; Anthony Greisinger; Sharon P Coan; David Lairson; Wenyaw Chan; S T Hawley; R E Myers
Journal:  Ann Behav Med       Date:  2011-06

Review 2.  Interventions to promote colorectal cancer screening: an integrative review.

Authors:  Susan M Rawl; Usha Menon; Allison Burness; Erica S Breslau
Journal:  Nurs Outlook       Date:  2012-01-18       Impact factor: 3.250

3.  Results of a community-based randomized trial to increase colorectal cancer screening among Filipino Americans.

Authors:  Annette E Maxwell; Roshan Bastani; Leda L Danao; Cynthia Antonio; Gabriel M Garcia; Catherine M Crespi
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2010-09-23       Impact factor: 9.308

4.  Cancer control needs of 2-1-1 callers in Missouri, North Carolina, Texas, and Washington.

Authors:  Jason Q Purnell; Matthew W Kreuter; Katherine S Eddens; Kurt M Ribisl; Peggy Hannon; Rebecca S Williams; Maria E Fernandez; David Jobe; Susan Gemmel; Marti Morris; Debbie Fagin
Journal:  J Health Care Poor Underserved       Date:  2012-05

5.  Colorectal cancer screening and physical activity promotion among obese women: an online evaluation of targeted messages.

Authors:  Lucia A Leone; Marci K Campbell; Marlyn Allicock; Michael Pignone
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  2012-07-09

6.  What Motivates Older Adults to Improve Diet and Exercise Patterns?

Authors:  Shoshana H Bardach; Nancy E Schoenberg; Britteny M Howell
Journal:  J Community Health       Date:  2016-02

7.  Colorectal cancer educational intervention targeting latino patients attending a community health center.

Authors:  Sheila F Castañeda; Yer Xiong; Linda C Gallo; Monica Yepes-Rios; Ming Ji; Ana C Talavera; Paulina M Mendoza; Gregory A Talavera
Journal:  J Prim Care Community Health       Date:  2012-01-06

8.  Effectiveness of a theory-based intervention to increase colorectal cancer screening among Iranian health club members: a randomized trial.

Authors:  Hamideh Salimzadeh; Hassan Eftekhar; Reza Majdzadeh; Ali Montazeri; Alireza Delavari
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  2013-09-13

9.  The NCI's Cancer Information Service's Research Continuum Framework: integrating research into cancer education practice (1999-2004).

Authors:  Linda Fleisher; Julie Kornfeld; Sharon Davis; Marion E Morra; Linda Squiers
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 2.037

Review 10.  Personalised risk communication for informed decision making about taking screening tests.

Authors:  Adrian G K Edwards; Gurudutt Naik; Harry Ahmed; Glyn J Elwyn; Timothy Pickles; Kerry Hood; Rebecca Playle
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2013-02-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.