Improving shared decision making for lung cancer treatment by developing and validating an open-source web based patient decision aid for stage I–II non-small cell lung cancer

IF 3.2 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Frontiers in digital health Pub Date : 2024-03-22 DOI:10.3389/fdgth.2023.1303261
I. Halilaj, A. Ankolekar, Anouk Lenaers, A. Chatterjee, Cary J. G. Oberije, Lisanne Eppings, Hans J. M. Smit, Lizza E. L. Hendriks, A. Jochems, R. Lieverse, J. V. van Timmeren, Anke Wind, Philippe Lambin
{"title":"Improving shared decision making for lung cancer treatment by developing and validating an open-source web based patient decision aid for stage I–II non-small cell lung cancer","authors":"I. Halilaj, A. Ankolekar, Anouk Lenaers, A. Chatterjee, Cary J. G. Oberije, Lisanne Eppings, Hans J. M. Smit, Lizza E. L. Hendriks, A. Jochems, R. Lieverse, J. V. van Timmeren, Anke Wind, Philippe Lambin","doi":"10.3389/fdgth.2023.1303261","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate a proof-of-concept open-source individualized Patient Decision Aid (iPDA) with a group of patients, physicians, and computer scientists. The iPDA was developed based on the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS). A previously published questionnaire was adapted and used to test the user-friendliness and content of the iPDA. The questionnaire contained 40 multiple-choice questions, and answers were given on a 5-point Likert Scale (1–5) ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.” In addition to the questionnaire, semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients. We performed a descriptive analysis of the responses. The iPDA was evaluated by 28 computer scientists, 21 physicians, and 13 patients. The results demonstrate that the iPDA was found valuable by 92% (patients), 96% (computer scientists), and 86% (physicians), while the treatment information was judged useful by 92%, 96%, and 95%, respectively. Additionally, the tool was thought to be motivating for patients to actively engage in their treatment by 92%, 93%, and 91% of the above respondents groups. More multimedia components and less text were suggested by the respondents as ways to improve the tool and user interface. In conclusion, we successfully developed and tested an iPDA for patients with stage I–II Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC).","PeriodicalId":73078,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in digital health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in digital health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fdgth.2023.1303261","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate a proof-of-concept open-source individualized Patient Decision Aid (iPDA) with a group of patients, physicians, and computer scientists. The iPDA was developed based on the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS). A previously published questionnaire was adapted and used to test the user-friendliness and content of the iPDA. The questionnaire contained 40 multiple-choice questions, and answers were given on a 5-point Likert Scale (1–5) ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.” In addition to the questionnaire, semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients. We performed a descriptive analysis of the responses. The iPDA was evaluated by 28 computer scientists, 21 physicians, and 13 patients. The results demonstrate that the iPDA was found valuable by 92% (patients), 96% (computer scientists), and 86% (physicians), while the treatment information was judged useful by 92%, 96%, and 95%, respectively. Additionally, the tool was thought to be motivating for patients to actively engage in their treatment by 92%, 93%, and 91% of the above respondents groups. More multimedia components and less text were suggested by the respondents as ways to improve the tool and user interface. In conclusion, we successfully developed and tested an iPDA for patients with stage I–II Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC).
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
通过开发和验证基于网络的开放源码非小细胞肺癌 I-II 期患者决策辅助工具,改善肺癌治疗的共同决策
本研究旨在与一组患者、医生和计算机科学家共同开发和评估一个概念验证型开源个性化患者决策辅助工具(iPDA)。iPDA 是根据国际患者决策辅助标准 (IPDAS) 开发的。为了测试 iPDA 的用户友好性和内容,对之前发布的问卷进行了改编和使用。问卷包含 40 道多项选择题,答案采用 5 分制李克特量表(1-5 分),从 "非常不同意 "到 "非常同意 "不等。除问卷调查外,我们还对患者进行了半结构化访谈。我们对回答进行了描述性分析。28 名计算机科学家、21 名医生和 13 名患者对 iPDA 进行了评估。结果表明,92%(患者)、96%(计算机科学家)和 86%(医生)认为 iPDA 有价值,而 92%、96% 和 95% 的人认为治疗信息有用。此外,上述受访群体中分别有 92%、93% 和 91% 的人认为该工具能激励患者积极参与治疗。受访者建议采用更多的多媒体组件和更少的文字来改进工具和用户界面。总之,我们成功地为 I-II 期非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)患者开发并测试了 iPDA。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊最新文献
A machine learning approach towards assessing consistency and reproducibility: an application to graft survival across three kidney transplantation eras. Attitudes and perceptions of Chinese oncologists towards artificial intelligence in healthcare: a cross-sectional survey. Smartphone-based drug testing in the hands of patients with substance-use disorder-a usability study. Imaging biobanks: operational limits, medical-legal and ethical reflections. Developing and testing a community based, online vs. face-to-face peer led intervention to improve mental well-being in Cambodian adults with physical disabilities.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1