Educational Program to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening: a Cluster Trial

NCT ID: NCT01805622

Last Updated: 2013-03-06

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

UNKNOWN

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

7200 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2012-08-31

Study Completion Date

2017-03-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

* Hypothesis 1. When compared to passive dissemination, active dissemination will result in greater participant enrollment.
* Hypothesis 2. The intervention will be offered with equal fidelity in churches, clinics and community sites.
* Hypothesis 3. Knowledge of CRC screening and perceived risk of CRC will be positively correlated.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

In this study, investigators aim to evaluate 20 community coalitions and 7,200 participants by: testing passive and active approaches to disseminating the Educational Program to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening (EPICS) to increase screening rates for colorectal cancer; measuring the extent to which EPICS is accepted and the fidelity of implementation in various settings and estimating the potential translatability and public health impact of EPICS. This four-arm cluster randomized trial (five community coalitions plus 1,800 African Americans, 50-74 years of age, who are not current on colorectal cancer (CRC) screening per arm) compares the following implementation strategies: (1) web access to facilitator training materials and toolkits without technical assistance (TA); (2) web access, but with technical assistance (TA); (3) in-person access to facilitator training materials and toolkits without TA and (4) in-person access with TA. Primary outcome measures are the reach (the proportion of representative eligible community coalitions and individuals participating in the trial) and effectiveness (post-intervention changes in CRC screening rates). Secondary outcomes include adoption (percentage of community coalitions implementing the EPICS sessions) and implementation (quality and consistency of the intervention delivery). The extent to which community coalitions continue to implement EPICS post-implementation (maintenance) will also be measured. Cost-effectiveness analysis will be conducted to compare passive to active dissemination costs. Investigators believe that implementing this evidence-based colorectal cancer screening intervention in partnership with community coalitions will result in more rapid adoption than traditional top-down approaches, and that changes in community CRC screening practices are more likely to be sustainable over time. With its national reach, this study has the potential to enhance understanding of barriers and enablers to the uptake of educational programs aimed at eliminating cancer health disparities.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Colorectal Cancer

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

SCREENING

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Passive Arm #1

Active Arm #1, 2; Passive Arm #1, 2 Community coalitions randomized to the Passive Arm #1-Web Access Without Technical Assistance will receive access to EPICS facilitator training materials and toolkits via the Research-Tested Intervention Programs (RTIPs) website and will not participate in monthly technical assistance teleconferences.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Active Arm #1, #2, Passive Arm #1, #2

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

This four-arm cluster randomized trial (five community coalitions plus 1,800 African Americans, 50-74 years of age, who are not current on CRC screening per arm) compares the following implementation strategies: (1) web access to facilitator training materials and toolkits without technical assistance (TA); (2) web access, but with technical assistance (TA); (3) in-person access to facilitator training materials and toolkits without TA and (4) in-person access with TA.

Passive Arm #2

Active Arm #1, #2; Passive Arm #1, #2 Community coalitions randomized to the Passive Arm #2-Web Access With Technical Assistance will receive access to EPICS facilitator training materials and toolkits via the Research-Tested Intervention Programs (RTIPs) website and will participate in monthly technical assistance teleconferences.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Active Arm #1, #2, Passive Arm #1, #2

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

This four-arm cluster randomized trial (five community coalitions plus 1,800 African Americans, 50-74 years of age, who are not current on CRC screening per arm) compares the following implementation strategies: (1) web access to facilitator training materials and toolkits without technical assistance (TA); (2) web access, but with technical assistance (TA); (3) in-person access to facilitator training materials and toolkits without TA and (4) in-person access with TA.

Active Arm #1

Active Arm #1, #2; Passive Arm #1, #2 Community coalitions randomized to Active Arm #1-In-Person Access Without Technical Assistance will receive training from intervention developers with access to facilitator training materials but will not participate in monthly technical assistance teleconferences.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Active Arm #1, #2, Passive Arm #1, #2

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

This four-arm cluster randomized trial (five community coalitions plus 1,800 African Americans, 50-74 years of age, who are not current on CRC screening per arm) compares the following implementation strategies: (1) web access to facilitator training materials and toolkits without technical assistance (TA); (2) web access, but with technical assistance (TA); (3) in-person access to facilitator training materials and toolkits without TA and (4) in-person access with TA.

Active Arm #2

Active Arm #1, #2; Passive Arm #1, #2 Community coalitions randomized to Active Arm #2-In-Person Access with Technical Assistance will receive training from intervention developers with access to facilitator training materials and will participate in monthly technical assistance teleconferences.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Active Arm #1, #2, Passive Arm #1, #2

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

This four-arm cluster randomized trial (five community coalitions plus 1,800 African Americans, 50-74 years of age, who are not current on CRC screening per arm) compares the following implementation strategies: (1) web access to facilitator training materials and toolkits without technical assistance (TA); (2) web access, but with technical assistance (TA); (3) in-person access to facilitator training materials and toolkits without TA and (4) in-person access with TA.

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Active Arm #1, #2, Passive Arm #1, #2

This four-arm cluster randomized trial (five community coalitions plus 1,800 African Americans, 50-74 years of age, who are not current on CRC screening per arm) compares the following implementation strategies: (1) web access to facilitator training materials and toolkits without technical assistance (TA); (2) web access, but with technical assistance (TA); (3) in-person access to facilitator training materials and toolkits without TA and (4) in-person access with TA.

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* African Americans, 50-74 years of age, who are not current on CRC screening, are eligible for study participation

Exclusion Criteria

* Individuals with a personal history of CRC or inflammatory bowel disease, blindness or severe hearing impairment; dementia; or other condition with life expectancy less than two years, are ineligible for participation
Minimum Eligible Age

50 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

74 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

National Cancer Institute (NCI)

NIH

Sponsor Role collaborator

Morehouse School of Medicine

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Selina A. Smith

Principal Investigator

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Selina A. Smith, PhD, MDiv

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Morehouse School of Medicine

Daniel S. Blumenthal, MD, MPH

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Morehouse School of Medicine

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Morehouse School of Medicine

Atlanta, Georgia, United States

Site Status RECRUITING

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

United States

Central Contacts

Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.

Selina A. Smith, PhD, MDiv

Role: CONTACT

(404) 752-1586

Daniel S. Blumenthal, MD, MPH

Role: CONTACT

(404) 752-1625

Facility Contacts

Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.

Selina A. Smith, PhD, MDiv

Role: primary

404-752-1586

Daniel S. Blumenthal, MD, MPH

Role: backup

(404) 752-1625

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Smith S, Johnson L, Wesley D, Turner KB, McCray G, Sheats J, Blumenthal D. Translation to practice of an intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening among African Americans. Clin Transl Sci. 2012 Oct;5(5):412-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1752-8062.2012.00439.x. Epub 2012 Aug 7.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 23067354 (View on PubMed)

Smith SA, Blumenthal DS. Community health workers support community-based participatory research ethics: lessons learned along the research-to-practice-to-community continuum. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2012 Nov;23(4 Suppl):77-87. doi: 10.1353/hpu.2012.0156.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 23124502 (View on PubMed)

Ansa BE, Alema-Mensah E, Sheats JQ, Mubasher M, Akintobi TH. Colorectal Cancer Knowledge and Screening Change in African Americans: Implementation Phase Results of the EPICS Cluster RCT. AJPM Focus. 2023 Jun 13;2(4):100121. doi: 10.1016/j.focus.2023.100121. eCollection 2023 Dec.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 37790949 (View on PubMed)

Smith SA, Blumenthal DS. Efficacy to effectiveness transition of an Educational Program to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening (EPICS): study protocol of a cluster randomized controlled trial. Implement Sci. 2013 Aug 7;8:86. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-8-86.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 23924263 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

1R01CA166785

Identifier Type: NIH

Identifier Source: secondary_id

View Link

EPICS cRCT

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

Test Up Now Education Program
NCT04304001 COMPLETED NA