DEVELOPING A FAMILIAL CANCER RISK ASSESSMENT TOOL FOR USE IN UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES
Author(s)
Bhattacharjee S1, Westman JA2, Kelly KM11West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, USA, 2Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
OBJECTIVES: Considering human factors in new technology is essential to ensure its acceptance, particularly in underserved communities. This study assessed the usability of the original (Flash) and new (HTML) versions of a self-administered familial cancer risk assessment tool- the Jameslink. METHODS: The study was a randomized, hybrid experimental design involving in-person usability testing of predominantly lower-income, African American individuals 18 years or older. Flash and HTML versions of the Jameslink were compared for the outcomes of grade (A-F), personal relevance, ease of use, and time to complete. RESULTS: Most of the respondents were female (71.2%) and African American (93.3%), with a mean age of 43.41 (±13.61) years. Many had annual income < $25,000 (33.9%) and education of high school degree or less (28.8%). Principal components analysis with Varimax rotation showed one factor solutions with eigen values>1 - Scale 1: ease of use of the program (understandability, organization, going through pages, and printing Jameslink) and Scale 2: relevance of Jameslink (important, interesting, makes sense, and self-relevant); both scales had excellent internal consistency (Cronbach’s alphas =0.822 and 0.866 respectively). Independent sample t-tests and chi-square analysis revealed that participants felt Flash provided more personally-relevant information and was easier to use compared to HTML. Further, they gave a better grade to Flash, and Flash took less time to complete (all p’s<0.05, adjusted). Grounded theory analysis found that Flash version was clear, concise, informative, but the layout could be improved whereas HTML version was confusing, stressful, complicated, and involved too much typing. CONCLUSIONS: Although we made an effort to integrate our familial cancer risk assessment tool in the HTML platform of a larger, personalized health assessment tool from the university, we found that our original Flash version was better accepted in this underserved population. Consideration of human factors is essential to encourage personalized health assessment and understanding of risk status.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2011-05, ISPOR 2011, Baltimore, MD, USA
Value in Health, Vol. 14, No. 3 (May 2011)
Code
PCN114
Topic
Health Technology Assessment
Topic Subcategory
Decision & Deliberative Processes
Disease
Oncology