Christina G S Palmer1, Patrick Boudreault2, Barbara A Berman3, Alicia Wolfson4, Lionel Duarte4, Vickie L Venne5, Janet S Sinsheimer6. 1. Department of Psychiatry & Biobehavioral Sciences, UCLA, USA; Department of Human Genetics, UCLA, USA; Institute for Society and Genetics, UCLA, USA. Electronic address: cpalmer@mednet.ucla.edu. 2. Gallaudet University, Washington DC, USA. 3. Department of Health Policy and Management, Fielding School of Public Health, UCLA, USA. 4. Department of Psychiatry & Biobehavioral Sciences, UCLA, USA. 5. Veterans Health Administration, UT, USA. 6. Department of Human Genetics, UCLA, USA; Institute for Society and Genetics, UCLA, USA; Department of Biomathematics, UCLA, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION:Deaf American Sign Language-users (ASL) have limited access to cancer genetics information they can readily understand, increasing risk for health disparities. We compared effectiveness of online cancer genetics information presented using a bilingual approach (ASL with English closed captioning) and a monolingual approach (English text). HYPOTHESIS: Bilingual modality would increase cancer genetics knowledge and confidence to create a family tree; education would interact with modality. METHODS: We used a parallel 2:1 randomized pre-post study design stratified on education. 150 Deaf ASL-users ≥18 years old with computer and internet access participated online; 100 (70 high, 30 low education) and 50 (35 high, 15 low education) were randomized to the bilingual and monolingual modalities. Modalities provide virtually identical content on creating a family tree, using the family tree to identify inherited cancer risk factors, understanding how cancer predisposition can be inherited, and the role of genetic counseling and testing for prevention or treatment. 25 true/false items assessed knowledge; a Likert scale item assessed confidence. Data were collected within 2 weeks before and after viewing the information. RESULTS: Significant interaction of language modality, education, and change in knowledge scores was observed (p = .01). High education group increased knowledge regardless of modality (Bilingual: p < .001; d = .56; Monolingual: p < .001; d = 1.08). Low education group increased knowledge with bilingual (p < .001; d = .85), but not monolingual (p = .79; d = .08) modality. Bilingual modality yielded greater confidence creating a family tree (p = .03). CONCLUSIONS:Bilingual approach provides a better opportunity for lower educated Deaf ASL-users to access cancer genetics information than a monolingual approach. Copyright Â
RCT Entities:
INTRODUCTION: Deaf American Sign Language-users (ASL) have limited access to cancer genetics information they can readily understand, increasing risk for health disparities. We compared effectiveness of online cancer genetics information presented using a bilingual approach (ASL with English closed captioning) and a monolingual approach (English text). HYPOTHESIS: Bilingual modality would increase cancer genetics knowledge and confidence to create a family tree; education would interact with modality. METHODS: We used a parallel 2:1 randomized pre-post study design stratified on education. 150 Deaf ASL-users ≥18 years old with computer and internet access participated online; 100 (70 high, 30 low education) and 50 (35 high, 15 low education) were randomized to the bilingual and monolingual modalities. Modalities provide virtually identical content on creating a family tree, using the family tree to identify inherited cancer risk factors, understanding how cancer predisposition can be inherited, and the role of genetic counseling and testing for prevention or treatment. 25 true/false items assessed knowledge; a Likert scale item assessed confidence. Data were collected within 2 weeks before and after viewing the information. RESULTS: Significant interaction of language modality, education, and change in knowledge scores was observed (p = .01). High education group increased knowledge regardless of modality (Bilingual: p < .001; d = .56; Monolingual: p < .001; d = 1.08). Low education group increased knowledge with bilingual (p < .001; d = .85), but not monolingual (p = .79; d = .08) modality. Bilingual modality yielded greater confidence creating a family tree (p = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Bilingual approach provides a better opportunity for lower educated Deaf ASL-users to access cancer genetics information than a monolingual approach. Copyright Â
Authors: Anita Y Kinney; Bret Hicken; Sara E Simonsen; Vickie Venne; Katrina Lowstuter; Jonathan Balzotti; Randall W Burt Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2007-01 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Noah D Kauff; Susan M Domchek; Tara M Friebel; Mark E Robson; Johanna Lee; Judy E Garber; Claudine Isaacs; D Gareth Evans; Henry Lynch; Rosalind A Eeles; Susan L Neuhausen; Mary B Daly; Ellen Matloff; Joanne L Blum; Paul Sabbatini; Richard R Barakat; Clifford Hudis; Larry Norton; Kenneth Offit; Timothy R Rebbeck Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-02-11 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Erin E Baldwin; Patrick Boudreault; Michelle Fox; Janet S Sinsheimer; Christina G S Palmer Journal: J Genet Couns Date: 2011-08-05 Impact factor: 2.537
Authors: Patrick Boudreault; Alicia Wolfson; Barbara Berman; Vickie L Venne; Janet S Sinsheimer; Christina Palmer Journal: J Genet Couns Date: 2017-12-20 Impact factor: 2.537
Authors: Guilherme Guarino de Moura Sá; Fernanda Lorrany Silva; Ana Maria Ribeiro Dos Santos; Julyanne Dos Santos Nolêto; Márcia Teles de Oliveira Gouveia; Lídya Tolstenko Nogueira Journal: Rev Lat Am Enfermagem Date: 2019-10-14
Authors: Yaroslava Robles-Bykbaev; Christian Oyola-Flores; Vladimir Espartaco Robles-Bykbaev; Martín López-Nores; Paola Ingavélez-Guerra; José Juan Pazos-Arias; Fernando Pesántez-Avilés; Manuel Ramos-Cabrer Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2019-10-17 Impact factor: 3.390