- Browse by Author
Browsing by Author "Emerson, Brent"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Factors associated with the accurate self-report of cancer screening behaviors among women living in the rural Midwest region of the United States(Elsevier, 2022-12) Katz, Mira L.; Stump, Timothy E.; Monahan, Patrick O.; Emerson, Brent; Baltic, Ryan; Young, Gregory S.; Hyer, J. Madison; Paskett, Electra D.; Champion, Victoria L.; Rawl, Susan M.; School of NursingThis study examines the accuracy of the self-report of up-to-date cancer screening behaviors (Mammography, Papanicolaou (Pap)/Human Papillomavirus (HPV) tests, Fecal Occult Blood Test (FOBT)/Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT), Colonoscopy) compared to medical record documentation prior to eligibility determination and enrollment in a randomized controlled trial of an intervention to increase cancer screening among women living in rural counties of Indiana and Ohio. Women (n = 1,641) completed surveys and returned a medical record release form from November 2016-June 2019. We compared self-report to medical records for up-to-date cancer screening behaviors to determine the validity of self-report. Logistic regression models identified variables associated with accurate reporting. Women were up-to-date for mammography (75 %), Pap/HPV test (54 %), colonoscopy (53 %), and FOBT/FIT (6 %) by medical record. Although 39.6 % of women reported being up-to-date for all three anatomic sites (breast, cervix, and colon), only 31.8 % were up to date by medical records. Correlates of accurate reporting of up-to-date cancer screening varied by screening test. Approximately-one-third of women in rural counties in the Midwest are up-to-date for all three anatomic sites and correlates of the accurate reporting of screening varied by test. Although most investigators use medical records to verify completion of cancer screening behaviors as the primary outcome of intervention trials, they do not usually use medical records for the routine verification of study eligibility. Study results suggest that future research should use medical record documentation of cancer screening behaviors to determine eligibility for trials evaluating interventions to increase cancer screening.Item Process Evaluation of a Mailed Interactive Educational DVD in a Comparative Effectiveness Trial to Promote Colorectal Cancer Screening(Sage, 2022) Katz, Mira L.; Emerson, Brent; Champion, Victoria L.; Schwartz, Peter H.; Impleriale, Thomas F.; Fatima, Hala; Paskett, Electra D.; Perkins, Susan M.; Tong, Yan; Gebregziabher, Netsanet; Krier, Connie; Tharp, Kevin; Malloy, Caeli; Strom, Sylvia; Rawl, Susan M.; School of NursingA process evaluation was conducted as part of a comparative effectiveness trial of a mailed interactive educational DVD intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening among average-risk patients who did not attend a scheduled colonoscopy. Participants (n = 371) for the trial were randomized to (1) mailed DVD, (2) mailed DVD plus patient navigation, or (3) usual care. Participants (n = 243) randomized to the two DVD intervention arms were called 2 weeks after mailing materials to complete a process evaluation interview about the DVD (September 2017-February 2020). Forty-nine (20%) participants were not reached, and 194 (80%) participants watched the DVD and completed the interview. The process evaluation assessed whether (1) the DVD content was helpful, (2) any new information was learned by participants, (3) the appropriate amount of information was included in the DVD, (4) participants were engaged when watching the DVD, (5) the DVD content was relevant, (6) participants were satisfied with the DVD (7) participants would recommend the DVD to others, and (8) their opinion about colorectal cancer screening was changed by watching the DVD. Among participants who watched the DVD, 99% reported the screening information was very or somewhat helpful, 47% learned new information, 75% said the DVD included the right amount of information, they were engaged (M = 3.35 out of 4, SD = 0.49), 87% reported all or most information applied to them, they were satisfied (M = 3.42 out of 4, SD = 0.39) with DVD content, 99% would recommend the DVD to others, and 45% reported changing their opinion about screening. To understand the effects of interventions being tested in trials and to plan the dissemination of evidence-based interventions, process evaluation is critical to assess the dose received and acceptability of behavioral interventions.