Cargando…

Impact of an informed choice invitation on uptake of screening for diabetes in primary care (DICISION): trial protocol

BACKGROUND: Screening invitations have traditionally been brief, providing information only about population benefits. Presenting information about the limited individual benefits and potential harms of screening to inform choice may reduce attendance, particularly in the more socially deprived. At...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mann, Eleanor, Prevost, A Toby, Griffin, Simon, Kellar, Ian, Sutton, Stephen, Parker, Michael, Sanderson, Simon, Kinmonth, Ann Louise, Marteau, Theresa M
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2009
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2666721/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19232112
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-9-63
_version_ 1782166067127255040
author Mann, Eleanor
Prevost, A Toby
Griffin, Simon
Kellar, Ian
Sutton, Stephen
Parker, Michael
Sanderson, Simon
Kinmonth, Ann Louise
Marteau, Theresa M
author_facet Mann, Eleanor
Prevost, A Toby
Griffin, Simon
Kellar, Ian
Sutton, Stephen
Parker, Michael
Sanderson, Simon
Kinmonth, Ann Louise
Marteau, Theresa M
author_sort Mann, Eleanor
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Screening invitations have traditionally been brief, providing information only about population benefits. Presenting information about the limited individual benefits and potential harms of screening to inform choice may reduce attendance, particularly in the more socially deprived. At the same time, amongst those who attend, it might increase motivation to change behavior to reduce risks. This trial assesses the impact on attendance and motivation to change behavior of an invitation that facilitates informed choices about participating in diabetes screening in general practice. Three hypotheses are tested: 1. Attendance at screening for diabetes is lower following an informed choice compared with a standard invitation. 2. There is an interaction between the type of invitation and social deprivation: attendance following an informed choice compared with a standard invitation is lower in those who are more rather than less socially deprived. 3. Amongst those who attend for screening, intentions to change behavior to reduce risks of complications in those subsequently diagnosed with diabetes are stronger following an informed choice invitation compared with a standard invitation. METHOD/DESIGN: 1500 people aged 40–69 years without known diabetes but at high risk are identified from four general practice registers in the east of England. 1200 participants are randomized by households to receive one of two invitations to attend for diabetes screening at their general practices. The intervention invitation is designed to facilitate informed choices, and comprises detailed information and a decision aid. A comparison invitation is based on those currently in use. Screening involves a finger-prick blood glucose test. The primary outcome is attendance for diabetes screening. The secondary outcome is intention to change health related behaviors in those attenders diagnosed with diabetes. A sample size of 1200 ensures 90% power to detect a 10% difference in attendance between arms, and in an estimated 780 attenders, 80% power to detect a 0.2 sd difference in intention between arms. DISCUSSION: The DICISION trial is a rigorous pragmatic denominator based clinical trial of an informed choice invitation to diabetes screening, which addresses some key limitations of previous trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN73125647
format Text
id pubmed-2666721
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2009
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-26667212009-04-08 Impact of an informed choice invitation on uptake of screening for diabetes in primary care (DICISION): trial protocol Mann, Eleanor Prevost, A Toby Griffin, Simon Kellar, Ian Sutton, Stephen Parker, Michael Sanderson, Simon Kinmonth, Ann Louise Marteau, Theresa M BMC Public Health Study Protocol BACKGROUND: Screening invitations have traditionally been brief, providing information only about population benefits. Presenting information about the limited individual benefits and potential harms of screening to inform choice may reduce attendance, particularly in the more socially deprived. At the same time, amongst those who attend, it might increase motivation to change behavior to reduce risks. This trial assesses the impact on attendance and motivation to change behavior of an invitation that facilitates informed choices about participating in diabetes screening in general practice. Three hypotheses are tested: 1. Attendance at screening for diabetes is lower following an informed choice compared with a standard invitation. 2. There is an interaction between the type of invitation and social deprivation: attendance following an informed choice compared with a standard invitation is lower in those who are more rather than less socially deprived. 3. Amongst those who attend for screening, intentions to change behavior to reduce risks of complications in those subsequently diagnosed with diabetes are stronger following an informed choice invitation compared with a standard invitation. METHOD/DESIGN: 1500 people aged 40–69 years without known diabetes but at high risk are identified from four general practice registers in the east of England. 1200 participants are randomized by households to receive one of two invitations to attend for diabetes screening at their general practices. The intervention invitation is designed to facilitate informed choices, and comprises detailed information and a decision aid. A comparison invitation is based on those currently in use. Screening involves a finger-prick blood glucose test. The primary outcome is attendance for diabetes screening. The secondary outcome is intention to change health related behaviors in those attenders diagnosed with diabetes. A sample size of 1200 ensures 90% power to detect a 10% difference in attendance between arms, and in an estimated 780 attenders, 80% power to detect a 0.2 sd difference in intention between arms. DISCUSSION: The DICISION trial is a rigorous pragmatic denominator based clinical trial of an informed choice invitation to diabetes screening, which addresses some key limitations of previous trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN73125647 BioMed Central 2009-02-20 /pmc/articles/PMC2666721/ /pubmed/19232112 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-9-63 Text en Copyright © 2009 Mann et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Study Protocol
Mann, Eleanor
Prevost, A Toby
Griffin, Simon
Kellar, Ian
Sutton, Stephen
Parker, Michael
Sanderson, Simon
Kinmonth, Ann Louise
Marteau, Theresa M
Impact of an informed choice invitation on uptake of screening for diabetes in primary care (DICISION): trial protocol
title Impact of an informed choice invitation on uptake of screening for diabetes in primary care (DICISION): trial protocol
title_full Impact of an informed choice invitation on uptake of screening for diabetes in primary care (DICISION): trial protocol
title_fullStr Impact of an informed choice invitation on uptake of screening for diabetes in primary care (DICISION): trial protocol
title_full_unstemmed Impact of an informed choice invitation on uptake of screening for diabetes in primary care (DICISION): trial protocol
title_short Impact of an informed choice invitation on uptake of screening for diabetes in primary care (DICISION): trial protocol
title_sort impact of an informed choice invitation on uptake of screening for diabetes in primary care (dicision): trial protocol
topic Study Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2666721/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19232112
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-9-63
work_keys_str_mv AT manneleanor impactofaninformedchoiceinvitationonuptakeofscreeningfordiabetesinprimarycaredicisiontrialprotocol
AT prevostatoby impactofaninformedchoiceinvitationonuptakeofscreeningfordiabetesinprimarycaredicisiontrialprotocol
AT griffinsimon impactofaninformedchoiceinvitationonuptakeofscreeningfordiabetesinprimarycaredicisiontrialprotocol
AT kellarian impactofaninformedchoiceinvitationonuptakeofscreeningfordiabetesinprimarycaredicisiontrialprotocol
AT suttonstephen impactofaninformedchoiceinvitationonuptakeofscreeningfordiabetesinprimarycaredicisiontrialprotocol
AT parkermichael impactofaninformedchoiceinvitationonuptakeofscreeningfordiabetesinprimarycaredicisiontrialprotocol
AT sandersonsimon impactofaninformedchoiceinvitationonuptakeofscreeningfordiabetesinprimarycaredicisiontrialprotocol
AT kinmonthannlouise impactofaninformedchoiceinvitationonuptakeofscreeningfordiabetesinprimarycaredicisiontrialprotocol
AT marteautheresam impactofaninformedchoiceinvitationonuptakeofscreeningfordiabetesinprimarycaredicisiontrialprotocol