Individualizing Disease Prevention for Middle-Aged Adults
30 maart 2022 bijgewerkt door: Glen Taksler
The primary objective of this study is to help patients compare the benefits of various preventive care services, based on their individual risk factors (such as smoking status, obesity, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, etc.).
A tailored decision tool will be provided to each participant during primary care appointments to facilitate discussion between the participant and his/her provider regarding prioritizing preventive service recommendations.
Studie Overzicht
Studietype
Ingrijpend
Inschrijving (Werkelijk)
104
Fase
- Niet toepasbaar
Contacten en locaties
In dit gedeelte vindt u de contactgegevens van degenen die het onderzoek uitvoeren en informatie over waar dit onderzoek wordt uitgevoerd.
Studie Locaties
-
-
Ohio
-
Cleveland, Ohio, Verenigde Staten, 44195
- Cleveland Clinic
-
-
Deelname Criteria
Onderzoekers zoeken naar mensen die aan een bepaalde beschrijving voldoen, de zogenaamde geschiktheidscriteria. Enkele voorbeelden van deze criteria zijn iemands algemene gezondheidstoestand of eerdere behandelingen.
Geschiktheidscriteria
Leeftijden die in aanmerking komen voor studie
45 jaar tot 70 jaar (Volwassen, Oudere volwassene)
Accepteert gezonde vrijwilligers
Ja
Geslachten die in aanmerking komen voor studie
Allemaal
Beschrijving
Inclusion Criteria:
- Scheduled for an appointment with primary care provider during study period
- Two or more of the following risk factors:
- Tobacco use
- Overweight/obese
- Hypertension
- Hyperlipidemia
- Diabetes
- Alcohol Misuse
- Depression
- History of Sexually Transmitted Infection
- Being overdue for the following screenings: Colorectal, cervical, breast, lung
Exclusion Criteria:
- Severely limited life expectancy (cancer, congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, end stage renal disease)
Studie plan
Dit gedeelte bevat details van het studieplan, inclusief hoe de studie is opgezet en wat de studie meet.
Hoe is de studie opgezet?
Ontwerpdetails
- Primair doel: Preventie
- Toewijzing: Gerandomiseerd
- Interventioneel model: Parallelle opdracht
- Masker: Geen (open label)
Wapens en interventies
Deelnemersgroep / Arm |
Interventie / Behandeling |
|---|---|
|
Geen tussenkomst: Controle
Gebruikelijke zorg
|
|
|
Experimenteel: Intervention
Individualized preventive care recommendations will be distributed to subjects.
|
Written material provided.
|
|
Experimenteel: Development Phase
Non-randomized receipt of individualized preventive care recommendations
|
Written material provided.
|
Wat meet het onderzoek?
Primaire uitkomstmaten
Uitkomstmaat |
Maatregel Beschrijving |
Tijdsspanne |
|---|---|---|
|
Interest in Individualized Preventive Care Recommendations.
Tijdsspanne: Within 3 days of index primary care appointment.
|
Measured by individualized preventive service recommendations, tailored to patient's specific medical conditions. Measured by surveys. Survey question: "Overall, how helpful did you find the written materials (handouts)?" Ten point scale (minimum 1, maximum 10, higher score is better outcome) |
Within 3 days of index primary care appointment.
|
|
Interest in Individualized Preventive Care Recommendations.
Tijdsspanne: Within 3 days of index primary care appointment.
|
Measured by individualized preventive service recommendations, tailored to patient's specific medical conditions. Measured by surveys. Survey question: "In the future, would you like to see updated written materials (handouts)?" Ten point scale (minimum 1, maximum 10, higher score is better outcome) |
Within 3 days of index primary care appointment.
|
Secundaire uitkomstmaten
Uitkomstmaat |
Maatregel Beschrijving |
Tijdsspanne |
|---|---|---|
|
Use of Shared Decision Making.
Tijdsspanne: Within 3 days of index primary care appointment.
|
Measured by surveys.
Survey metric: Shared Decision Making (SDM)-Q-9 validated scale, converted to 100 point denominator 100 point scale (minimum 1, maximum 100, higher score is better outcome)
|
Within 3 days of index primary care appointment.
|
|
Patient Readiness to Change Health Behaviors.
Tijdsspanne: Within 3 days of index primary care appointment.
|
Measured by surveys.
Proportion of top-3 individualized preventive service recommendations ready to change over next 1 month Numerator: Number of top-3-ranked recommendations with score >=6 out of 7 on Likert scale for readiness to change over next 1 month (minimum=1, maximum=7, higher score was better) Denominator: The number of individualized preventive service recommendations provided to a patient or 3, whichever was lower
|
Within 3 days of index primary care appointment.
|
|
Patient Readiness to Change Health Behaviors
Tijdsspanne: Within 3 days of index primary care appointment
|
Measured by surveys Proportion of top-3 individualized preventive service recommendations ready to change over next 2-6 months Numerator: Number of top-3-ranked recommendations with score >=6 out of 7 on Likert scale for readiness to change over next 2-6 months (minimum=1, maximum=7, higher score was better) Denominator: The number of individualized preventive service recommendations provided to a patient or 3, whichever was lower
|
Within 3 days of index primary care appointment
|
|
Patient Readiness to Change Health Behaviors.
Tijdsspanne: Within 3 days of index primary care appointment
|
Measured by surveys Proportion of bottom-3 individualized preventive service recommendations ready to change over next 1 month Numerator: Number of bottom-3-ranked recommendations with score >=6 out of 7 on Likert scale for readiness to change over next 1 month (minimum=1, maximum=7, higher score was better) Denominator: The number of individualized preventive service recommendations provided to a patient or 3, whichever was lower
|
Within 3 days of index primary care appointment
|
|
Patient Readiness to Change Health Behaviors
Tijdsspanne: Within 3 days of index primary care appointment
|
Measured by surveys.
Proportion of bottom-3 individualized preventive service recommendations ready to change over next 2-6 months Numerator: Number of bottom-3-ranked recommendations with score >=6 out of 7 on Likert scale for readiness to change over next 2-6 months (minimum=1, maximum=7, higher score was better) Denominator: The number of individualized preventive service recommendations provided to a patient or 3, whichever was lower
|
Within 3 days of index primary care appointment
|
|
Decisional Comfort.
Tijdsspanne: Within 3 days of index primary care appointment.
|
Measured by surveys.
Survey metric: Decisional Conflict Scale (validated scale), converted to 100 point denominator 100 point scale (minimum 1, maximum 100, higher score is better outcome)
|
Within 3 days of index primary care appointment.
|
|
Preventive Care Outcomes for Patients.
Tijdsspanne: Within 1 year of index primary care appointment.
|
Number of participants with at least 1 follow-up encounter during the 1 year after an index encounter.
|
Within 1 year of index primary care appointment.
|
Medewerkers en onderzoekers
Hier vindt u mensen en organisaties die betrokken zijn bij dit onderzoek.
Sponsor
Medewerkers
Onderzoekers
- Hoofdonderzoeker: Glen Taksler, PhD, The Cleveland Clinic
Publicaties en nuttige links
De persoon die verantwoordelijk is voor het invoeren van informatie over het onderzoek stelt deze publicaties vrijwillig ter beschikking. Dit kan gaan over alles wat met het onderzoek te maken heeft.
Algemene publicaties
- Elwyn G, Frosch D, Thomson R, Joseph-Williams N, Lloyd A, Kinnersley P, Cording E, Tomson D, Dodd C, Rollnick S, Edwards A, Barry M. Shared decision making: a model for clinical practice. J Gen Intern Med. 2012 Oct;27(10):1361-7. doi: 10.1007/s11606-012-2077-6. Epub 2012 May 23.
- Hawley ST, Zikmund-Fisher B, Ubel P, Jancovic A, Lucas T, Fagerlin A. The impact of the format of graphical presentation on health-related knowledge and treatment choices. Patient Educ Couns. 2008 Dec;73(3):448-55. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2008.07.023. Epub 2008 Aug 27.
- Kriston L, Scholl I, Holzel L, Simon D, Loh A, Harter M. The 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9). Development and psychometric properties in a primary care sample. Patient Educ Couns. 2010 Jul;80(1):94-9. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2009.09.034. Epub 2009 Oct 30.
- Prochaska JO, DiClemente CC. Stages and processes of self-change of smoking: toward an integrative model of change. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1983 Jun;51(3):390-5. doi: 10.1037//0022-006x.51.3.390. No abstract available.
- Prochaska JO, DiClemente CC, Norcross JC. In search of how people change. Applications to addictive behaviors. Am Psychol. 1992 Sep;47(9):1102-14. doi: 10.1037//0003-066x.47.9.1102.
- Elwyn G, Edwards A, Wensing M, Hood K, Atwell C, Grol R. Shared decision making: developing the OPTION scale for measuring patient involvement. Qual Saf Health Care. 2003 Apr;12(2):93-9. doi: 10.1136/qhc.12.2.93.
- Krist AH, Glenn BA, Glasgow RE, Balasubramanian BA, Chambers DA, Fernandez ME, Heurtin-Roberts S, Kessler R, Ory MG, Phillips SM, Ritzwoller DP, Roby DH, Rodriguez HP, Sabo RT, Sheinfeld Gorin SN, Stange KC; MOHR Study Group. Designing a valid randomized pragmatic primary care implementation trial: the my own health report (MOHR) project. Implement Sci. 2013 Jun 25;8:73. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-8-73.
- Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Smith DM, Ubel PA, Fagerlin A. Validation of the Subjective Numeracy Scale: effects of low numeracy on comprehension of risk communications and utility elicitations. Med Decis Making. 2007 Sep-Oct;27(5):663-71. doi: 10.1177/0272989X07303824. Epub 2007 Jul 24.
- Fagerlin A, Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Ubel PA, Jankovic A, Derry HA, Smith DM. Measuring numeracy without a math test: development of the Subjective Numeracy Scale. Med Decis Making. 2007 Sep-Oct;27(5):672-80. doi: 10.1177/0272989X07304449. Epub 2007 Jul 19.
- Glasgow RE, Kessler RS, Ory MG, Roby D, Gorin SS, Krist A. Conducting rapid, relevant research: lessons learned from the My Own Health Report project. Am J Prev Med. 2014 Aug;47(2):212-9. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2014.03.007. Epub 2014 Jun 18.
- Edwards A, Elwyn G. Inside the black box of shared decision making: distinguishing between the process of involvement and who makes the decision. Health Expect. 2006 Dec;9(4):307-20. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2006.00401.x.
- Nagykaldi Z, Aspy CB, Chou A, Mold JW. Impact of a Wellness Portal on the delivery of patient-centered preventive care. J Am Board Fam Med. 2012 Mar-Apr;25(2):158-67. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.2012.02.110130.
- Sepucha KR, Fagerlin A, Couper MP, Levin CA, Singer E, Zikmund-Fisher BJ. How does feeling informed relate to being informed? The DECISIONS survey. Med Decis Making. 2010 Sep-Oct;30(5 Suppl):77S-84S. doi: 10.1177/0272989X10379647.
- Dillard AJ, Ferrer RA, Ubel PA, Fagerlin A. Risk perception measures' associations with behavior intentions, affect, and cognition following colon cancer screening messages. Health Psychol. 2012 Jan;31(1):106-13. doi: 10.1037/a0024787. Epub 2011 Aug 1.
- Phillips SM, Glasgow RE, Bello G, Ory MG, Glenn BA, Sheinfeld-Gorin SN, Sabo RT, Heurtin-Roberts S, Johnson SB, Krist AH; MOHR Study Group. Frequency and prioritization of patient health risks from a structured health risk assessment. Ann Fam Med. 2014 Nov-Dec;12(6):505-13. doi: 10.1370/afm.1717.
- Tait AR, Voepel-Lewis T, Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Fagerlin A. Presenting research risks and benefits to parents: does format matter? Anesth Analg. 2010 Sep;111(3):718-23. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e3181e8570a. Epub 2010 Aug 4.
- Tait AR, Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Fagerlin A, Voepel-Lewis T. Effect of various risk/benefit trade-offs on parents' understanding of a pediatric research study. Pediatrics. 2010 Jun;125(6):e1475-82. doi: 10.1542/peds.2009-1796. Epub 2010 May 10.
- Tait AR, Voepel-Lewis T, Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Fagerlin A. The effect of format on parents' understanding of the risks and benefits of clinical research: a comparison between text, tables, and graphics. J Health Commun. 2010 Jul;15(5):487-501. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2010.492560.
- Lloyd A, Joseph-Williams N, Edwards A, Rix A, Elwyn G. Patchy 'coherence': using normalization process theory to evaluate a multi-faceted shared decision making implementation program (MAGIC). Implement Sci. 2013 Sep 5;8:102. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-8-102.
- Taksler GB, Hu B, DeGrandis F Jr, Montori VM, Fagerlin A, Nagykaldi Z, Rothberg MB. Effect of Individualized Preventive Care Recommendations vs Usual Care on Patient Interest and Use of Recommendations: A Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Nov 1;4(11):e2131455. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.31455.
Studie record data
Deze datums volgen de voortgang van het onderzoeksdossier en de samenvatting van de ingediende resultaten bij ClinicalTrials.gov. Studieverslagen en gerapporteerde resultaten worden beoordeeld door de National Library of Medicine (NLM) om er zeker van te zijn dat ze voldoen aan specifieke kwaliteitscontrolenormen voordat ze op de openbare website worden geplaatst.
Bestudeer belangrijke data
Studie start (Werkelijk)
22 februari 2017
Primaire voltooiing (Werkelijk)
12 maart 2020
Studie voltooiing (Werkelijk)
12 maart 2021
Studieregistratiedata
Eerst ingediend
13 januari 2017
Eerst ingediend dat voldeed aan de QC-criteria
13 januari 2017
Eerst geplaatst (Schatting)
18 januari 2017
Updates van studierecords
Laatste update geplaatst (Werkelijk)
26 april 2022
Laatste update ingediend die voldeed aan QC-criteria
30 maart 2022
Laatst geverifieerd
1 maart 2022
Meer informatie
Termen gerelateerd aan deze studie
Andere studie-ID-nummers
- 16-854
Plan Individuele Deelnemersgegevens (IPD)
Bent u van plan om gegevens van individuele deelnemers (IPD) te delen?
NEE
Informatie over medicijnen en apparaten, studiedocumenten
Bestudeert een door de Amerikaanse FDA gereguleerd geneesmiddel
Nee
Bestudeert een door de Amerikaanse FDA gereguleerd apparaatproduct
Nee
Deze informatie is zonder wijzigingen rechtstreeks van de website clinicaltrials.gov gehaald. Als u verzoeken heeft om uw onderzoeksgegevens te wijzigen, te verwijderen of bij te werken, neem dan contact op met register@clinicaltrials.gov. Zodra er een wijziging wordt doorgevoerd op clinicaltrials.gov, wordt deze ook automatisch bijgewerkt op onze website .