Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Responses to a Theoretically Adapted Clinical Trial Education Session: Faith-Based Sites Versus Rural Work Site Dissemination

  • Published:
Journal of Cancer Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The process for advancing biomedical knowledge depends upon recruiting an adequate and representative sample of individuals to voluntarily participate in research studies. A consistent personal barrier to cancer clinical trial participation is the lack of awareness and understanding related to trial availability, and the prevention and treatment roles participation represents. In particular, comprehensive community-based approaches to recruit and educate rural residents are needed. Moreover, consistent under representation of priority populations should be addressed with innovative outreach to collaborate in identifying culturally meaningful approaches. A theoretically adapted version of a component of the National Cancer Institute's "Clinical Trial Education Series" was assessed via educational sessions delivered through work sites and churches. From eight focus groups with 90 participants, we found that church leaders, congregants, and community members were receptive to education on cancer research, increased their short-term knowledge about it, and intent to participate in cancer studies, decreased their current anxiety about clinical trials participation, and provided specific suggestions for further adapting the educational session to be even more culturally relevant. These outcomes provide evidence to support the effectiveness of future customized recruitment strategies embedded within a community or faith-based environment that may increase knowledge, decrease anxiety and intent to actual participation in cancer studies, as well as impact study representativeness and address causes of health disparities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. EDICT (2008) Major deficiencies in the design and funding of clinical trials: a report to the nation improving on how human studies are conducted. Houston, TX.: Baylor College of Medicine

  2. Comis RL, Miller JD, Aldige CR, Krebs L, Stoval E (2003) Public attitudes toward participation in cancer clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 21(5):830–835

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Mills EJ, Seely D, Rachlis B et al (2006) Barriers to participation in clinical trials of cancer: a meta-analysis and systematic review of patient-reported factors. Lancet Oncol 7(2):141–148

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. National Cancer Institute (2009) Clinical trialCTs education series. http://www.cancer.gov/clinicaltrials/learning/clinical-trials-education-series Accessed 30 Jan 2009

  5. Weiss EH, Golant M, Thornton A et al (2004) Open to options: a cancer clinical trials education pilot study. ASCO Meeting Abstracts 22(14 supplement):6116

    Google Scholar 

  6. Burhansstipanov L, Krebs LU, Bradley A et al (2003) Lessons learned while developing "Clinical Trials Education for Native Americans" curriculum. Cancer Control 10(5 Suppl):29–36

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Knowles MS (1980) The modern practice of adult education: from pedagogy to andragogy, 2nd edn. Cambridge Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  8. Merriam SB (2001) Andragogy and self-directed learning: pillars of adult learning theory. New Dir Adult Cont Educ 80:3–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Grace AP (1996) Striking a critical pose: andragogy-missing links, missing values. Int J of Lifelong Educ 15(5):382–392

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Coyne CA, Demian-Popescu C, Brown P (2004) Rural cancer patients' perspectives on clinical trials: a qualitative study. J Cancer Educ 19(3):165–169

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Paskett ED, Cooper MR, Stark N et al (2002) Clinical trial enrollment of rural patients with cancer. Cancer Pract 10(1):28–35

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Swanson GM, Ward AJ (1995) Recruiting minorities into clinical trials toward a participant-friendly system. J Natl Cancer Inst 87(23):1747–1759

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Coyne CA, Demian-Popescu C, Friend D (2006) Social and cultural factors influencing health in southern West Virginia: a qualitative study. Preventing Chronic Disease 3(4):A124

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Clark JW, Dawson LE (1996) Personal religiousness and ethical judgments: an empirical analysis. J Bus Eth 15:359–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Simpson MR, King MG (1999) “God brought all these churches together:” issues in developing religion–health partnerships in an Appalachian community. Public Health Nurs 16(1):41–49

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Hunsucker S, Flannery J, Frank D (2000) Coping strategies of rural families of critically ill patients. J Am Acad Nurse Pract 12(4):123–127

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. MacAvoy S, Lippman DT (2001) Teaching culturally competent care: nursing students experience in rural Appalachia. J Transcult Nurs 12(3):221–227

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Cohen LH, Fine BA, Pergament E (1998) An assessment of ethnocultural beliefs regarding the causes of birth defects and genetic disorders. J Genet Couns 7:15–29

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Weil J (1991) Mothers' postcounseling beliefs about the causes of their children's genetic disorders. Am J Hum Genet 48:145–153

    PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hatch JW, Cunningham AC, Woods WW, Snipes FC (1986) The Fitness through Churches project: description of a community-based cardiovascular health promotion intervention. Hygie 5(3):9–12

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Chatter LM, Levin JS, Ellison CG (1998) Public health and health education in faith communities. Health Education Behavior 25(6):689–699

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. DeHaven MJ, Hunter IB, Wilder L, Walton JW, Berry J (2004) Health programs in faith-based organizations: are they effective? Am J Public Heath 94(6):1030–1036

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kaplan SA, Calman NS, Golub M, Ruddock C, Billings J (2006) The role of faith-based weight intervention for black women: a case study of an initiative in the southwest Bronx. J Health Care Poor Underserved 17(2 Suppl):9–19

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Campbell MK, Hudson MA, Resnicow K, Blakeney N, Paxton A, Baskin M (2007) Church-based health promotion interventions: evidence and lessons learned. Annual Review of Public Health 28(1):213–234

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Hippolyte JM, Phillips-Caesar EG, Winston GJ, Charlson ME, Peterson JC (2013) Recruitment and retention techniques for developing faith-based research partnerships, New York City, 2009–2012. Prev Chronic Dis 10:120–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors appreciate the collaborative efforts of the Appalachia Community Cancer Network (5 U01 CA 114622 and 5 U54 CA 153604), the Northern Appalachia Cancer Network, and the Community Sciences and Health Outcomes Core, Pennsylvania State Hershey Cancer Institute in identifying community sites and partners for this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Public Health Sciences, Pennsylvania State College of Medicine, Suite 2200, 600 Centerview Drive, A210, Hershey, PA, 17033, USA

    Betsy B. Aumiller, Eugene J. Lengerich, Oralia Dominic, Fabian Camacho, Eric Lehman, Nancy R. Gallant & Thomas P. Loughran

  2. Communication Arts and Sciences, Penn State College of the Liberal Arts, University Park, PA, 16802, USA

    Roxanne Parrott

  3. Community Sciences and Health Outcomes Core, Penn State Hershey Cancer Institute, Hershey, PA, 17033, USA

    Eugene J. Lengerich & Thomas P. Loughran

Authors
  1. Betsy B. Aumiller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Roxanne Parrott
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Eugene J. Lengerich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Oralia Dominic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Fabian Camacho
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Eric Lehman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Nancy R. Gallant
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Thomas P. Loughran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Betsy B. Aumiller.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Aumiller, B.B., Parrott, R., Lengerich, E.J. et al. Responses to a Theoretically Adapted Clinical Trial Education Session: Faith-Based Sites Versus Rural Work Site Dissemination. J Canc Educ 28, 698–708 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-013-0517-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-013-0517-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation