Personal Relevance, Trust and Privacy Concerns Among Cancer Survivors Who Did Not Visit a Research Website Offering Free Genetic Counseling Services for Families (Preprint)

Author:

James Shepperd,McBride Colleen M.,An Weihua,Zhao JingsongORCID,Pentz Rebecca D.,Escoffery Cam,Ward Kevin C.,Guan Yue

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Digital health tools, such as online websites now proliferate to assist individuals in managing their health. With user input, we developed the Your Family Connects (YFC) website to promote access to genetic services for survivors of ovarian cancer and their relatives. While we estimated that half or more would access the website, only 18% of invited survivors did so. We assessed the extent to which perceived relevance of the information provided, trust and privacy concerns influenced decisions not to access the website.

OBJECTIVE

We designed a theory-based cross-sectional survey to explore the following questions: (1) to what extent did nonresponders endorse privacy concerns; (2) were privacy concerns associated with recall of receiving the website invitation, time since diagnosis, age, and race; and (3) could we identify profiles of nonresponders that would guide the development of future interventions to encourage engagement in health websites for families affected by inherited cancers?

METHODS

A sample of survivors who were eligible to access the website yet did not respond to the study invitation were identified by linking study IDs to the Georgia Cancer Registry (GCR) information. The survey was brief and contained 27 items including recall of the invitation, perceived salience of ovarian cancer risk assessment, benefits of using health websites, trust in health websites, and trust in university-based health research. We conducted confirmatory factor analyses (CFA), regression analyses, ANOVA, correlation analyses, and logistic regression to address research questions.

RESULTS

Of the 650 nonresponders who we sent the short survey, 368 (56.3%) responded and provided sufficient data for analysis. The mean response of 2.57 on the trust scale was significantly below the scale midpoint of 3, t(360)=11.78, p < .001, suggesting that survivors who did not log on were on average distrustful of health websites. Belonging to a minority group was associated with being most trusting and less skeptical about health websites. Just 196 nonresponders (30.1%) recalled the invitation to visit the website. Logistic regression analysis indicated that age was the only significant predictor of recall. Testing a model with age, minority status, and the six privacy concerns correctly classified 58.8% of nonresponders, a rate of successful classification that wThe nonresponders in the present study—particularly the White non-responders—were skeptical of website platforms regardless of whether they recalled receiving a website invitation or not. Social marketing approaches geared toward building trust in web platforms by building a relationship with an information consumer and in collaboration with trusted organizations warrants further investigation. as not appreciably better than a logistic regression analysis that included only age as a predictor.

CONCLUSIONS

The nonresponders in the present study—particularly the White non-responders—were skeptical of website platforms regardless of whether they recalled receiving a website invitation or not. Social marketing approaches geared toward building trust in web platforms by building a relationship with an information consumer and in collaboration with trusted organizations warrants further investigation.

CLINICALTRIAL

NCT04927013

Publisher

JMIR Publications Inc.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3