Cited by 65Patient-Provider Communication in HealthcareProstate Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentHealth Literacy and Information Accessibility

Evaluation of a Computer-Based Decision Aid for Promoting Informed Prostate Cancer Screening Decisions Among African American Men: iDecide

Owens, Otis L., Felder, Tisha, Tavakoli, Abbas S., Revels, Asa A., Friedman, Daniela B., Hughes-Halbert, Chanita, Hébert, James R.·2019·American Journal of Health Promotion

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the effects of iDecide on prostate cancer knowledge, informed decision-making self-efficacy, technology use self-efficacy, and intention to engage in informed decision-making among African American men. Design: One-group, pretest/posttest. Setting: Community settings in South Carolina. Participants: African American men, ages 40 years +, without a prior prostate cancer diagnosis (n = 354). Intervention: iDecide, an embodied conversational agent-led, computer-based prostate cancer screening decision aid. Measures: Prostate cancer knowledge, informed decision-making self-efficacy, technology use self-efficacy, and intention to engage in informed decision-making. Analysis: Descriptive statistics, paired t tests, general linear modeling, Spearman correlations. Results: On average, participants experienced significant improvements in their prostate cancer knowledge ( P ≤ .001), informed decision-making self-efficacy ( P ≤ .001), and technology use self-efficacy ( P ≤ .001), postintervention. Additionally, 67% of participants reported an intention to engage in informed decision-making. Conclusion: Given the significant improvements across all measures, this research demonstrates that embodied conversational agent-led decision aids can be used to enhance the capacity for making informed prostate cancer screening decisions among African American men and increase their technology use self-efficacy. One critical limitation of this study is that most men had received prostate cancer screening prior to engaging in our intervention, so the implications of this intervention may be different for men who do not have a history of screening. Additionally, actual engagement in informed decision-making postintervention was not assessed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0890117118786866

Cites

67 of 67 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Owens, O. L., Felder, T., Tavakoli, A. S., Revels, A. A., Friedman, D. B., Hughes-Halbert, C., & Hébert, J. R.
Affiliations
  • University of South Carolina (US)
  • Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Hollings Cancer Center Medical University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA
Corresponding author
Owens, Otis L.
Venue
American Journal of Health Promotion
Published
2018-07-11
Volume
33
Issue
2
Pages
267-278
ISSN
  • 0890-1171 (ISSN-L)
  • 2168-6602
OpenAlex
W2833507391
Cited by
65
References
67
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 4
FWCI
6.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Health Promotion (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Scholar Commons (University of South Carolina) (submittedVersion)
Funders
University of South Carolina (Office of the Vice President for Research)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
Keywords
prostate cancer screening, informed decision-making, decision aids, computer-based decision aid, embodied conversational agents, African American men, decision-making self-efficacy, prostate cancer knowledge, health technology adoption
MeSH terms
Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Attitude to Computers, Black or African American, Decision Support Techniques, Health Promotion, Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Participation, Prostatic Neoplasms, Socioeconomic Factors, South Carolina, Prostate-Specific Antigen, Self Efficacy, Early Detection of Cancer

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review