Cosmetology Students and Skin Cancer
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
Arkansas
-
Little Rock, Arkansas, United States, 72205
- University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- For Schools: the school director agrees to participate and provide written consent
- For Students: Students were eligible at the enrolled schools if they agreed in writing to participate, filled out the baseline questionnaire, and viewed the assigned video.
Exclusion Criteria:
- The school had not recently or was not currently implementing a similar program.
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Other
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: None (Open Label)
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: Educational video
The educational video on skin cancer for cosmetologists
|
The educational video on skin cancer for cosmetologists
|
|
Active Comparator: Control video
A publicly accessible healthy lifestyle video on YouTube, which did not contain any information on skin cancer
|
A publicly accessible healthy lifestyle video on YouTube, which does not contain any information on skin cancer
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Students' knowledge
Time Frame: 3 - 6 months
|
Scale name: Change in students' scores for knowledge of skin cancer, risk factors, and recognizing an abnormal skin spot.
What scale measures: Scores were computed as the proportion of questions that the student correctly answered, and change in scores was computed by subtracting the pre-test score from the post-test score.
If a student correctly answered a greater proportion of questions on the post-test compared to the pre-test, then they would have a positive value for the change in scores, and would be classified as increasing their knowledge.
Scale ranges: The change in scores range from -100% to 100%; a change >0% is considered to be an increase in score and a better outcome, whereas change <0% is considered to be a decrease or a worse outcome.
Subscales: The 3 subscales are: 1) knowledge of skin cancer, 2) risk factors, and 3) recognition of abnormal spots.
The total number of correct answers are summed and divided by the total number of questions to calculate the total score.
|
3 - 6 months
|
|
Perceived importance, interest in, and confidence in looking for abnormal spots
Time Frame: 3 - 6 months
|
Name of scale: Change in students' perceived importance, interest in, and confidence in looking for abnormal skin spots.
What scale measures: Students selected from the following for perceived importance, interest in, and confidence in looking for abnormal skin spots: i)not at all; ii)slightly/a little bit; iii)somewhat; iv)definitely; or v) very/extremely important/interested in/confidence in (where i represents the lowest level and v represents the highest level).
Self-reported post-tests were compared to pre-tests.
If the amount of the self-reported importance, interest in or confidence was higher on the post-test compared to the pre-test, then it is considered an increase and a better outcome.
Scale ranges: The change for perceived importance, interest in, and confidence in looking for abnormal skin spots were classified only as an increase (better outcome) or not (worse outcome).
|
3 - 6 months
|
|
Skin cancer risk behaviors
Time Frame: 3 - 6 months
|
Name of scale: Change in indoor tanning, outdoor tanning, sunscreen and hat use.
What scale measures: Students were asked to select from the following frequencies for tanning: 3-7 times per week, 1-2 times per week, 3-7 times in the last 2 months, 1-2 times in the last 2 months, none in the last 2 months.
Students selected from the following for hat/sunscreen use: everyday, 1-6 times per week, 1-3 times per month, <1 time per month, or never.
If the frequency of tanning was lower on the post-test compared to the pre-test, then it was classified as a decrease (which is a better outcome).
If the frequency of sunscreen use/hat use was higher on the post-test compared to the pre-test, then it was classified as an increase (which is a better outcome).
Scale range: The change for sunscreen/hat use was classified only as increasing (the better outcome) or not (the worse outcome); the change in tanning use was classified only as decreasing (the better outcome) or not (the worse outcome).
|
3 - 6 months
|
|
Communication with clients
Time Frame: 3 - 6 months
|
Outcomes: Change in looking for abnormal skin spots, talking with clients about skin cancer prevention, and recommending a client see a doctor when an abnormal spot is seen.
Students selected from the following proportion of clients in the last month they looked at for abnormal spots: none, <25%, 25-50%, 51-75%, or >75%; if the frequency for looking for abnormal spots reported on the post-test was greater than on the pre-test, then there was an increase (better outcome).
Students also reported whether they discussed skin cancer prevention as either 'yes' or 'no', and whether or not they had ever recommended that a client see a doctor for an abnormal skin spot.
Other outcomes were whether or not students reported on the post-test they looked for abnormal spots on >50% and >75% of their clients.
Talking with clients about skin cancer prevention, and recommending a client see a doctor was increased (a better outcome) if they responded 'no' on the pre-test and 'yes' on the post-test.
|
3 - 6 months
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Investigators
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Lori A Fischbach (co-Principal Investigator), PhD, University of Arkansas
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Actual)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Actual)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- 205582
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.