Assessing the impact of user-centered research on a clinical trial eHealth tool via counterbalanced research design

Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association

Volumn 18, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 24-31

  Atkinson, Nancy L ^a   Massett, Holly A ^b   Mylks, Christy ^c   McCormack, Lauren A ^d   Kish Doto, Julia ^d   Hesse, Bradford W ^b   Wang, Min Qi ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

^b NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

^c IDox Solutions   (United States)

^d RTI INTERNATIONAL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CLINICAL RESEARCH; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECISION MAKING; ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORD; EVALUATION; EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN; FEMALE; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; INTERNET; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MEDICAL RESEARCH; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RATING SCALE;

ADULT; AGED; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; CONSUMER HEALTH INFORMATION; FEMALE; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMANS; INTERNET; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PATIENT SELECTION; PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT; SINGLE-BLIND METHOD; UNITED STATES; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE;

EID: 78650469756     PISSN: 10675027     EISSN: 1527974X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/jamia.2010.006122     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. National Institutes of Health. National Cancer Institute. The NCI Strategic Plan for Leading the Nation to Eliminate the Suffering and Death Due to Cancer. NIH Publication No. 06-5773, Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, 2006.
2. Mathews C, Restivo A, Raker C, et al. Willingness of gynecological cancer patients to participate in clinical trials. Gynecol Oncol 2009;112:161-5.
3. Fernandez CV, Barr RD. Adolescents and young adults with cancer: An orphaned population. Paediatr Child Health 2006;11:103-6.
4. Go RS, Frisby KA, Lee JA, et al. Clinical trial accrual among new cancer patients at a community-based cancer center. Cancer 2006;106:426-33.
5. Wei SJ, Metz JM, Coyle C, et al. Recruitment of patients into an internet-based clinical trials database: the experience of OncoLink and the National Colorectal Cancer Research Alliance 2004;22:4730-6.
6. Metz JM, Coyle C, Hudson C, et al. An Internet-based cancer clinical trials matching resource. J Med Internet Res 2005;7:e24. http://www.jmir.org/2005/3/e24/.
7. Atkinson NL, Saperstein SL, Massett HA, et al. Using the Internet to search for cancer clinical trials: A comparative audit of clinical trial search tools. Contemp Clin Trials 2008;29:555-64.
8. Embi PJ, Jain A, Clark J, et al. Effect of a clinical trial alert system on physician participation in trial recruitment. Arch Intern Med 2005;165:2272-7.
9. Mills EJ, Seely D, Rachlis B, et al. Barriers to participation in clinical trials of cancer: a meta-analysis and systematic review of patient-reported factors. Lancet Oncol 2006;7:141-8.
10. Comis RL, Miller JD, Aldigé CR, et al. Public attitudes toward participation in cancer clinical trials. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:830-5.
11. Jenkins V, Fallowfield L. Reasons for accepting or declining to participate in randomized clinical trials for cancer therapy. B J Cancer 2000;82:1783-8.
12. Mancini J, Gene've J, Dalenc F, et al. Decision-making and breast cancer clinical trials: How experience challenges attitudes. Contemp Clin Trials 2007;28:684-94.
13. Shieh C, Mays R, McDaniel A, et al. Health literacy and its association with the use of information sources and with barriers to information seeking in clinic-based pregnant women. Health Care Women Int 2009;30:971-88.
14. Nielsen J. Mental models for search are getting firmer. Useit.com 2005. http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20050509.html (accessed 11 Sep 2006).
15. Atkinson NL, Massett HA, Mylks C, et al. User-centered research on breast cancer patient needs and preferences on an internet-based clinical trials matching system. J Med Internet Res 2007;9:e13. http://www.jmir.org/2007/2/e13/.
16. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Research-based web design & usability guidelines. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services; 2006. [FREE full text].
17. Kushniruk AW, Patel VL. Cognitive and usability engineering methods for the evaluation of clinical information systems. J of Biomed Inform 2004;37:56-76.
18. Willis GB. Cognitive Interviewing: A Tool for Improving Questionnaire Design. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications, 2005.
19. National Research Council. Computational Technology for Effective Health Care: Immediate Steps and Strategic Directions. Washington: National Academies Press, 2009.
20. Myers A, Hansen CH. Experimental psychology. 6th edn. Florence, KY: Wadsworth Publishing, 2005.
21. Barnum CM. Usability testing and research. New York: Longman, 2002.
22. Sternberg RJ, Roediger HL III, Halpern DF, eds. Critical thinking in psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.
23. Nielsen J, Tahir M. Homepage Usability: 50 websites Deconstructed. Indianapolis, IN: New Riders, 2002.
24. Hesse BW. Enhancing consumer involvement in health care. In: Parker JC, Thornson E, eds. Health communication in the new media landscape. New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company, 2008:119-49.