LungTalk and leveraging Facebook-targeted Advertisement (FBTA) addresses the call to develop and test multi-level, cancer communication interventions using innovative methods and designs. The study's long term goal is to increase lung cancer screening uptake among appropriate, high-risk individuals nationwide.
Conditions
Conditions (1)
Free-text conditions as registered, with the CancerIndex entity they were reconciled to and the match type.
Tailored health communication intervention (LungTalk)
description
Participants will receive the tailored health intervention "LungTalk". LungTalk is a 10-15 minute long computer-tailored health communication and decision-making tool that is theoretically grounded in the Conceptual Model on Lung Cancer Screening Participation.
interventionNames
Behavioral: LungTalk
type
ACTIVE_COMPARATOR
label
Non-tailored Intervention
description
Participants will receive non-tailored American Cancer Society (ACS) Lung Screening Informational Video as per standard of care. ACS Lung Screening Informational Video (ACS LSIV) is a non-tailored 5-minute video from the American Cancer Society about lung cancer screening designed for the lay individual.
interventionNames
Behavioral: Non-tailored intervention - Standard of practice
Primary outcomes (19)
Eligibility
Eligibility (as posted)
Sex
All
Minimum age
50 Years
Maximum age
80 Years
Show eligibility criteria text
Inclusion Criteria:
* ≥20-pack-year smoking history;
* Individuals who currently smoke or quit smoking within the past 15 years
Exclusion Criteria:
* Previously undergone LDCT for early detection of lung cancer, have a lung nodule or nodules that are currently being followed
* Has ever been diagnosed with lung cancer
* Individuals with impaired decision-making (because our primary outcome is decision-making, we will not include individuals with impaired decision-making)
References
Publications (56)
BACKGROUNDFinal recommendation statement: Lung cancer screening. U. S. Preventive Services Task Force. Updated March 9, 2021. Accessed May 26, 2021, 2021. https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/document/RecommendationStatementFinal/lung-cancer-screening
BACKGROUNDUnited States Preventive Services Task Force. Final recommendation statement: Lung cancer screening. Updated Updated December 2016. Accessed May 21, 2020. http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Document/RecommendationStatementFinal/lung-cancer-screening
BACKGROUNDNational Lung Screening Trial Research Team; Aberle DR, Adams AM, Berg CD, Black WC, Clapp JD, Fagerstrom RM, Gareen IF, Gatsonis C, Marcus PM, Sicks JD. Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med. 2011 Aug 4;365(5):395-409. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1102873. Epub 2011 Jun 29. PMID 21714641
BACKGROUNDDe Koning H. ES 02.01 The Dutch-Belgian Lung Cancer Screening Trial (NELSON). Journal of Thoracic Oncology. 2017;12(11):S1611. doi:10.1016/j.jtho.2017.09.108
BACKGROUNDCenters for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Decision memo for screening for lung cancer with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) (CAG-00439N). Accessed May 21, 2020. https://www.cms.gov/medicare-coverage-database/details/nca-decision-memo.aspx?NCAId=274
BACKGROUNDOkereke IC, Nishi S, Zhou J, Goodwin JS. Trends in lung cancer screening in the United States, 2016-2017. J Thorac Dis. 2019 Mar;11(3):873-881. doi: 10.21037/jtd.2019.01.105. PMID 31019776
BACKGROUNDCarter-Harris L, Ceppa DP, Hanna N, Rawl SM. Lung cancer screening: what do long-term smokers know and believe? Health Expect. 2017 Feb;20(1):59-68. doi: 10.1111/hex.12433. Epub 2015 Dec 23. PMID 26701339
BACKGROUNDCarter-Harris L, Brandzel S, Wernli KJ, Roth JA, Buist DSM. A qualitative study exploring why individuals opt out of lung cancer screening. Fam Pract. 2017 Apr 1;34(2):239-244. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmw146.
measure
Reaching Screening Eligible Individuals Via Social Media - Reach
timeFrame
11-month period ad remained active on Facebook
description
Leveraging a well-established, social media-based platform (Facebook) to target screening-eligible individuals in the community. This will be measured by the total number of people who saw the FBTA at least once.
measure
Reaching Screening Eligible Individuals Via Social Media - Link Clicks
timeFrame
11-month period ad remained active on Facebook
description
Leveraging a well-established, social media-based platform (Facebook) to target screening-eligible individuals in the community. This will be measured by the total number of clicks on the link within the FBTA that led to the REDCap survey platform of the study.
measure
Reaching Screening Eligible Individuals Via Social Media - Impressions
timeFrame
11-month period ad remained active on Facebook
description
Leveraging a well-established, social media-based platform (Facebook) to target screening-eligible individuals in the community. This will be measured by the total number of times the FBTA was on screen (may include multiple views of the ad by the same person/people).
measure
Effectiveness of LungTalk - Knowledge Assessment
timeFrame
At baseline
description
The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve total knowledge about lung screening. The total Knowledge of Lung Cancer Screening will be assessed with a 9-item multidimensional scale ranging from 0 to 9 with 0 being "No Knowledge" and 9 being "Complete knowledge".
measure
Effectiveness of LungTalk - Knowledge Assessment
timeFrame
At one week from baseline survey completion
description
The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve total knowledge about lung screening. The total Knowledge of Lung Cancer Screening will be assessed with a 9-item multidimensional scale ranging from 0 to 9 with 0 being "No Knowledge" and 9 being "Complete knowledge".
measure
Effectiveness of LungTalk - Perceived Risk
timeFrame
At baseline
description
The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve Perceived Risk. Perceived Risk of Lung Cancer is a 3-item scale with Likert-type responses. The range of scores is 3 to 12 (higher perceived risk of lung cancer).
measure
Effectiveness of LungTalk - Perceived Risk
timeFrame
At one week from baseline survey completion
description
The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve Perceived Risk. Perceived Risk of Lung Cancer is a 3-item scale with Likert-type responses. The range of scores is 3 to 12 (higher perceived risk of lung cancer).
measure
Effectiveness of LungTalk - Perceived Benefits
timeFrame
At baseline
description
The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve Perceived Benefits. Perceived Benefits of Lung Cancer Screening is a 6-item scale with responses ranging from 1=strongly disagree to 4=strongly agree. The range of scores is 6 to 24 (higher perceived benefits).
measure
Effectiveness of LungTalk - Perceived Benefits
timeFrame
At one week from baseline survey completion
description
The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve Perceived Benefits. Perceived Benefits of Lung Cancer Screening is a 6-item scale with responses ranging from 1=strongly disagree to 4=strongly agree. The range of scores is 6 to 24 (higher perceived benefits).
measure
Effectiveness of LungTalk - Perceived Barriers
timeFrame
At baseline
description
The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve Perceived Barriers. Perceived Barriers to Lung Cancer Screening. This scale has 17 items with four-point Likert responses where 1=strongly disagree and 4=strongly agree. The range of scores is 17 to 68 (higher perceived barriers).
measure
Effectiveness of LungTalk - Perceived Barriers
timeFrame
At one week from baseline survey completion
description
The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve Perceived Barriers. Perceived Barriers to Lung Cancer Screening. This scale has 17 items with four-point Likert responses where 1=strongly disagree and 4=strongly agree. The range of scores is 17 to 68 (higher perceived barriers).
measure
Effectiveness of LungTalk - Self-Efficacy
timeFrame
At baseline
description
The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve Self-Efficacy. Self-Efficacy for Lung Cancer Screening will be assessed using a scale with nine items with a four-point Likert response option to assess individual beliefs about ability to arrange and complete a low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) to screen for lung cancer. The range of scores is 9 to 36 (higher levels of self-efficacy).
measure
Effectiveness of LungTalk - Self-Efficacy
timeFrame
At one week from baseline survey completion
description
The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve Self-Efficacy. Self-Efficacy for Lung Cancer Screening will be assessed using a scale with nine items with a four-point Likert response option to assess individual beliefs about ability to arrange and complete a low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) to screen for lung cancer. The range of scores is 9 to 36 (higher levels of self-efficacy).
measure
Effectiveness of LungTalk - Occurrence of a Patient-Clinician Discussion
timeFrame
At baseline
description
The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve Occurrence of a Patient-Clinician Discussion. Occurrence of a Patient-Clinician Discussion about Lung Cancer Screening will be assessed with a single item requiring dichotomous (Y/N) response regarding a discussion with their healthcare provider.
measure
Effectiveness of LungTalk - Occurrence of a Patient-Clinician Discussion
timeFrame
At one week from baseline survey completion
description
The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve Occurrence of a Patient-Clinician Discussion. Occurrence of a Patient-Clinician Discussion about Lung Cancer Screening will be assessed with a single item requiring dichotomous (Y/N) response regarding a discussion with their healthcare provider.
measure
Effectiveness of LungTalk - Occurrence of a Patient-Clinician Discussion
timeFrame
At 6 months from baseline survey completion
description
The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve Occurrence of a Patient-Clinician Discussion. Occurrence of a Patient-Clinician Discussion about Lung Cancer Screening will be assessed with a single item requiring dichotomous (Y/N) response regarding a discussion with their healthcare provider.
measure
Effectiveness of LungTalk - Screening Uptake
timeFrame
At baseline
description
The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve Screening Uptake, Lung Cancer Screening Uptake will be assessed via self-report via the stages of adoption algorithm for lung screening. There are seven stages (unaware, aware but unengaged, undecided, decided not to act, decided to act, action, and maintenance).
measure
Effectiveness of LungTalk - Screening Uptake
timeFrame
At one week from baseline survey completion
description
The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve Screening Uptake, Lung Cancer Screening Uptake will be assessed via self-report via the stages of adoption algorithm for lung screening. There are seven stages (unaware, aware but unengaged, undecided, decided not to act, decided to act, action, and maintenance).
measure
Effectiveness of LungTalk - Screening Uptake
timeFrame
At 6 months from baseline survey completion
description
The assessment plan is intended to compare the effectiveness of a tailored (LungTalk) versus non-tailored health communication and decision support tool delivered online to improve Screening Uptake, Lung Cancer Screening Uptake will be assessed via self-report via the stages of adoption algorithm for lung screening. There are seven stages (unaware, aware but unengaged, undecided, decided not to act, decided to act, action, and maintenance).
BACKGROUNDCarter-Harris L, Slaven JE Jr, Monahan PO, Shedd-Steele R, Hanna N, Rawl SM. Understanding lung cancer screening behavior: Racial, gender, and geographic differences among Indiana long-term smokers. Prev Med Rep. 2018 Feb 3;10:49-54. doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2018.01.018. eCollection 2018 Jun. PMID 29552458
BACKGROUNDCarter-Harris L, Comer RS, Goyal A, Vode EC, Hanna N, Ceppa D, Rawl SM. Development and Usability Testing of a Computer-Tailored Decision Support Tool for Lung Cancer Screening: Study Protocol. JMIR Res Protoc. 2017 Nov 16;6(11):e225. doi: 10.2196/resprot.8694. PMID 29146565
BACKGROUNDChambers DA, Glasgow RE, Stange KC. The dynamic sustainability framework: addressing the paradox of sustainment amid ongoing change. Implement Sci. 2013 Oct 2;8:117. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-8-117. PMID 24088228
BACKGROUNDUnited States Preventive Services Task Force. Final recommendation statement: Lung cancer screening. Accessed October 10. http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Document/RecommendationStatementFinal/lung-cancer-screening
BACKGROUNDUnited States Preventive Services Task Force. Draft recommendation statement: lung cancer: Screening July 7, 2020. Accessed October 10. https://uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/draft-recommendation/lung-cancer-screening-2020
BACKGROUNDCarter-Harris L, Comer RS, Slaven Ii JE, Monahan PO, Vode E, Hanna NH, Ceppa DP, Rawl SM. Computer-Tailored Decision Support Tool for Lung Cancer Screening: Community-Based Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial. J Med Internet Res. 2020 Nov 3;22(11):e17050. doi: 10.2196/17050. PMID 33141096
BACKGROUNDCarter-Harris L, Tan AS, Salloum RG, Young-Wolff KC. Patient-provider discussions about lung cancer screening pre- and post-guidelines: Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS). Patient Educ Couns. 2016 Nov;99(11):1772-1777. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2016.05.014. Epub 2016 May 17. PMID 27241830
BACKGROUNDCarter-Harris L, Slaven JE 2nd, Monohan P, Rawl SM. Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the Lung Cancer Screening Health Belief Scales. Cancer Nurs. 2017 May/Jun;40(3):237-244. doi: 10.1097/NCC.0000000000000386. PMID 27244666
BACKGROUNDCarter-Harris L, Slaven JE 2nd, Monahan PO, Draucker CB, Vode E, Rawl SM. Understanding lung cancer screening behaviour using path analysis. J Med Screen. 2020 Jun;27(2):105-112. doi: 10.1177/0969141319876961. Epub 2019 Sep 24. PMID 31550991
BACKGROUNDCarter-Harris L, Bartlett Ellis R, Warrick A, Rawl S. Beyond Traditional Newspaper Advertisement: Leveraging Facebook-Targeted Advertisement to Recruit Long-Term Smokers for Research. J Med Internet Res. 2016 Jun 15;18(6):e117. doi: 10.2196/jmir.5502. PMID 27306780
BACKGROUNDFacebook Distribution of Users by Age Group in the U.S. Facebook. Accessed May 26, 2021, 2021. https://www.statista.com/statistics/187549/facebook-distribution-of-users-age-group-usa/
BACKGROUNDFrandsen M, Walters J, Ferguson SG. Exploring the viability of using online social media advertising as a recruitment method for smoking cessation clinical trials. Nicotine Tob Res. 2014 Feb;16(2):247-51. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntt157. Epub 2013 Oct 14. PMID 24127266
BACKGROUNDRamo DE, Prochaska JJ. Broad reach and targeted recruitment using Facebook for an online survey of young adult substance use. J Med Internet Res. 2012 Feb 23;14(1):e28. doi: 10.2196/jmir.1878. PMID 22360969
BACKGROUNDRamo DE, Hall SM, Prochaska JJ. Reaching young adult smokers through the internet: comparison of three recruitment mechanisms. Nicotine Tob Res. 2010 Jul;12(7):768-75. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntq086. Epub 2010 Jun 7. PMID 20530194
BACKGROUNDRamo DE, Delucchi KL, Liu H, Hall SM, Prochaska JJ. Young adults who smoke cigarettes and marijuana: analysis of thoughts and behaviors. Addict Behav. 2014 Jan;39(1):77-84. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2013.08.035. Epub 2013 Sep 7. PMID 24090626
BACKGROUNDSmith A, Anderson M. Social media use in 2018. Pew Internet.org. Updated October 9. https://www.pewinternet.org/2018/03/01/social-media-use-in-2018/
BACKGROUNDUnited States Adults Social Platform Use. Social networking platforms' demographics update 2019. Marketingcharts.com,. Accessed October 9, https://www.marketingcharts.com/charts/us-adults-social-platform-use-demographic-group-2019/attachment/pew-social-platform-use-by-demographic-apr2019
BACKGROUNDAlbada A, Ausems MG, Bensing JM, van Dulmen S. Tailored information about cancer risk and screening: a systematic review. Patient Educ Couns. 2009 Nov;77(2):155-71. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2009.03.005. Epub 2009 Apr 18. PMID 19376676
BACKGROUNDKrebs P, Prochaska JO, Rossi JS. A meta-analysis of computer-tailored interventions for health behavior change. Prev Med. 2010 Sep-Oct;51(3-4):214-21. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2010.06.004. Epub 2010 Jun 15. PMID 20558196
BACKGROUNDNoar SM, Benac CN, Harris MS. Does tailoring matter? Meta-analytic review of tailored print health behavior change interventions. Psychol Bull. 2007 Jul;133(4):673-93. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.133.4.673. PMID 17592961
BACKGROUNDKreuter M, Farrell D, Olevitch L, Brennan L. Tailoring health messages: Customizing communication with computer technology. Tailoring health messages: Customizing communication with computer technology. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers; 2000:xiii, 270-xiii, 270.
BACKGROUNDRawl SM, Skinner CS, Perkins SM, Springston J, Wang HL, Russell KM, Tong Y, Gebregziabher N, Krier C, Smith-Howell E, Brady-Watts T, Myers LJ, Ballard D, Rhyant B, Willis DR, Imperiale TF, Champion VL. Computer-delivered tailored intervention improves colon cancer screening knowledge and health beliefs of African-Americans. Health Educ Res. 2012 Oct;27(5):868-85. doi: 10.1093/her/cys094. Epub 2012 Aug 27. PMID 22926008
BACKGROUNDRuffin MT 4th, Fetters MD, Jimbo M. Preference-based electronic decision aid to promote colorectal cancer screening: results of a randomized controlled trial. Prev Med. 2007 Oct;45(4):267-73. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2007.07.003. Epub 2007 Jul 14. PMID 17689600
BACKGROUNDWu TY, Lin C. Developing and evaluating an individually tailored intervention to increase mammography adherence among Chinese American women. Cancer Nurs. 2015 Jan-Feb;38(1):40-9. doi: 10.1097/NCC.0000000000000126. PMID 24621965
BACKGROUNDAhmad F, Cameron JI, Stewart DE. A tailored intervention to promote breast cancer screening among South Asian immigrant women. Soc Sci Med. 2005 Feb;60(3):575-86. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.05.018. PMID 15550305
BACKGROUNDChampion V, Foster JL, Menon U. Tailoring interventions for health behavior change in breast cancer screening. Cancer Pract. 1997 Sep-Oct;5(5):283-8. PMID 9341350
BACKGROUNDLau YK, Caverly TJ, Cherng ST, Cao P, West M, Arenberg D, Meza R. Development and validation of a personalized, web-based decision aid for lung cancer screening using mixed methods: a study protocol. JMIR Res Protoc. 2014 Dec 19;3(4):e78. doi: 10.2196/resprot.4039. PMID 25532218
BACKGROUNDMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Lung cancer screening decision tool. Accessibility verified February 12, 2016. Accessed October 7, 2020. http://nomograms.mskcc.org/Lung/Screening.aspx
BACKGROUNDChen Y, Marcus MW, Niaz A, Duffy SW, Field JK. My Lung Risk: a user-friendly, web-based calculator for risk assessment of lung cancer based on the validated Liverpool Lung Project risk prediction model. International Journal of Health Promotion and Education. 2014/05/04 2014;52(3):144-152. doi:10.1080/14635240.2014.888814
BACKGROUNDVolk RJ, Linder SK, Leal VB, Rabius V, Cinciripini PM, Kamath GR, Munden RF, Bevers TB. Feasibility of a patient decision aid about lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography. Prev Med. 2014 May;62:60-3. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2014.02.006. Epub 2014 Feb 8. PMID 24518006
BACKGROUNDVeterans Health Administration. Veterans Health Administration, Screening for lung cancer pamphlet. Accessibility verified February 12, 2016. Accessed September 29,. http://www.prevention.va.gov/docs/LungCancerScreeningHandout.pdf.
BACKGROUNDDharod A, Bellinger C, Foley K, Case LD, Miller D. The Reach and Feasibility of an Interactive Lung Cancer Screening Decision Aid Delivered by Patient Portal. Appl Clin Inform. 2019 Jan;10(1):19-27. doi: 10.1055/s-0038-1676807. Epub 2019 Jan 9. PMID 30625501
BACKGROUNDCarter-Harris L, Davis LL, Rawl SM. Lung Cancer Screening Participation: Developing a Conceptual Model to Guide Research. Res Theory Nurs Pract. 2016 Nov 1;30(4):333-352. doi: 10.1891/1541-6577.30.4.333. PMID 28304262
BACKGROUNDMcDonnell KK, Strayer SM, Sercy E, Campbell C, Friedman DB, Cartmell KB, Eberth JM. Developing and testing a brief clinic-based lung cancer screening decision aid for primary care settings. Health Expect. 2018 Aug;21(4):796-804. doi: 10.1111/hex.12675. Epub 2018 Feb 23. PMID 29473696
BACKGROUNDAmerican Cancer Society. Cancer Screening Tests Videos. Accessed October 9. https://www.cancer.org/healthy/find-cancer-early/cancer-screening-tests-videos.html
BACKGROUNDAmerican Cancer Society. Lung Cancer Screening Guidelines. Accessed October 9. https://www.cancer.org/health-care-professionals/american-cancer-society-prevention-early-detection-guidelines/lung-cancer-screening-guidelines.html
BACKGROUNDFACEBOOK for developers. Facebook Analytics Accessed October 9, 2020. https://developers.facebook.com/docs/analytics/
BACKGROUNDGlasgow RE, Vogt TM, Boles SM. Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: the RE-AIM framework. Am J Public Health. 1999 Sep;89(9):1322-7. doi: 10.2105/ajph.89.9.1322. PMID 10474547
BACKGROUNDRussomanno J, Patterson JG, Jabson Tree JM. Social Media Recruitment of Marginalized, Hard-to-Reach Populations: Development of Recruitment and Monitoring Guidelines. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2019 Dec 2;5(4):e14886. doi: 10.2196/14886. PMID 31789598
BACKGROUNDGO2 Foundation. Screening Centers of Excellence citation. Accessed October 9, 2020, (https://go2foundation.org/risk-early-detection/screening-centers/)
BACKGROUNDRaudenbush Stephen W, Bryk Anthony S, eds. Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods. 2 ed. SAGE Publications, Inc.; 2002.
BACKGROUNDGraham JW, Hofer SM, Donaldson SI, MacKinnon DP, Schafer JL. Analysis with missing data in prevention research. In: Bryant K, Windle M, West S, eds. The science of prevention: methodological advances from alcohol and substance abuse research. American Psychological Association; 1997:325-366.
BACKGROUNDSchafer JL, Olsen MK. Multiple Imputation for Multivariate Missing-Data Problems: A Data Analyst's Perspective. Multivariate Behav Res. 1998 Oct 1;33(4):545-71. doi: 10.1207/s15327906mbr3304_5. PMID 26753828
BACKGROUNDHedeker D, Gibbons RD. Application of random-effects pattern-mixture models for missing data in longitudinal studies. Psychological Methods. 1997;2(1):64-78. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.2.1.64
BACKGROUNDBenjamini Y, Hochberg Y. On the Adaptive Control of the False Discovery Rate in Multiple Testing With Independent Statistics. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics. 2000;25(1):60-83. doi:10.3102/10769986025001060
BACKGROUNDArigo D, Pagoto S, Carter-Harris L, Lillie SE, Nebeker C. Using social media for health research: Methodological and ethical considerations for recruitment and intervention delivery. Digit Health. 2018 May 7;4:2055207618771757. doi: 10.1177/2055207618771757. eCollection 2018 Jan-Dec. PMID 29942634
DERIVEDCarter-Bawa L, Banerjee SC, Comer RS, Kale MS, King JC, Leopold KT, Monahan PO, Ostroff JS, Slaven JE Jr, Valenzona F, Wiener RS, Rawl SM. Leveraging social media to increase lung cancer screening awareness, knowledge and uptake among high-risk populations (The INSPIRE-Lung Study): study protocol of design and methods of a community-based randomized controlled trial. BMC Public Health. 2023 May 26;23(1):975. doi: 10.1186/s12889-023-15857-8. PMID 37237339
DERIVEDLisa CB, Banerjee SC, Ostroff JS, Kale MS, King JC, Leopold KT, Monahan PO, Slaven JE Jr, Wiener RS, Valenzona F, Rawl SM, Comer RS. Leveraging social media to increase lung cancer screening awareness, knowledge and uptake among high-risk populations (The INSPIRE-Lung Study): Study protocol of design and methods of a community-based randomized controlled trial. Res Sq [Preprint]. 2023 May 4:rs.3.rs-2846041. doi: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-2846041/v1. PMID 37205569