Comparison of Video-Based Versus Written Patient Education on Melanoma

April 20, 2015 updated by: University of California, Davis

Comparison of Video-based Versus Written Patient Education on Melanoma

The purpose of this study is to compare the effect of video-based patient education with written instruction on subjects' understanding of melanoma.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Conditions

Intervention / Treatment

Detailed Description

We plan to conduct a randomized, controlled trial comparing the effect of video-based patient education with written instruction on subjects' understanding of melanoma.

Subjects randomized to the video-based education arm will be instructed to watch a video on the definition of melanoma, risk factors associated with the development of melanoma, and signs that should prompt an evaluation for melanoma. Subjects randomized to the written education arm will receive written information on the definition of melanoma, risk factors associated with the development of melanoma, and signs that should prompt an evaluation for melanoma. The contents of the video and the written educational materials will be comparable.

At the end of the study period 1 month later, subjects will be interviewed via telephone regarding their understanding of melanoma. Subjects will also be interviewed regarding their comprehension and attitude towards video-based and written education materials.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

78

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • United States
    • California
      • Sacramento, California, United States, 95816
        • University of California Davis Department of Dermatology

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • 18 years of age or older at time of consent, may be men or women.
  • Able to adhere to the study visit schedule and other protocol requirements.
  • Capable of giving informed consent.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Non-English speaking individuals.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Video-based education arm:
Subjects receiving the video-based educational material
Other: Patient Educational Materials
In the experimental arm, the intervention is the video-based patient educational material on melanoma. In the active comparison arm (control arm), the comparison intervention is written patient educational material on melanoma.
Other Names:
  • Patient educational materials on melanoma detection
Active Comparator: Written education arm:
Subjects receiving the written educational material
Other: Patient Educational Materials
In the experimental arm, the intervention is the video-based patient educational material on melanoma. In the active comparison arm (control arm), the comparison intervention is written patient educational material on melanoma.
Other Names:
  • Patient educational materials on melanoma detection

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Time Frame
Knowledge of melanoma detection.
Time Frame: 1 month
1 month

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Time Frame
Subjects' comprehension and attitude towards video-based and written education materials.
Time Frame: 1 month
1 month

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

University of California, Davis

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: April W Armstrong, MD, University of California, Davis

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

Helpful Links

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

January 1, 2009

Primary Completion (Actual)

May 1, 2009

Study Completion (Actual)

July 1, 2009

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

January 20, 2009

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 21, 2009

First Posted (Estimate)

January 22, 2009

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

April 22, 2015

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

April 20, 2015

Last Verified

April 1, 2015

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

  • 200816692-1

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.

Subscribe