Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 24, 2026

Author Spotlight: Advancing Prostate Cancer Research Through Improved Tissue Sampling and Biobanking
Published on: November 17, 2023
User-testing an interactive option grid decision aid for prostate cancer screening: lessons to improve usability
Peter Scalia1, Marie-Anne Durand1, Marjan Faber2
1The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire, USA.
Objective:
To user-test a web-based, interactive Option Grid decision aid 'prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test: yes or no?' to determine its usability, acceptability and feasibility with men of high and low health literacy.
Design:
A semi-structured interview study.
Setting:
Interviews were conducted at a senior centre, academic hospital or college library in New Hampshire and Vermont.
Participants:
Individuals over 45 years of age with no history of prostate cancer who voluntarily contacted study authors after viewing local invitations were eligible for inclusion. Twenty interviews were conducted: 10 participants had not completed a college degree, of which eight had low health literacy, and 10 participants had high health literacy.
Intervention:
An interactive, web-based Option Grid patient decision aid for considering whether or not to have a PSA test.
Results:
Users with lower health literacy levels were able to understand the content in the tool but were not able to navigate the Option Grid independent of assistance. The tool was used independently by men with high health literacy. In terms of acceptability, the flow of questions and answers embedded in the tool did not seem intuitive to some users who preferred seeing more risk information related to age and family history. Users envisioned that the tool could be feasibly implemented in clinical workflows.
Conclusion:
Men in our sample with limited health literacy had difficulty navigating the Option Grid, thus suggesting that the tool was not appropriately designed to be usable by all audiences. The information provided in the tool is acceptable, but users preferred to view personalised risk information. Some participants could envision using this tool prior to an encounter in order to facilitate a better dialogue with their clinician.
Ethics Approval:
The study received ethical approval from the Dartmouth College Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects (STUDY00030116).
Related Concept Videos
Decision Making
Automatic decision-making is fast, intuitive, and relies on gut feelings...
Decision Making: P-value Method
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is proposed. The claim is based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to the claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses: a null hypothesis would be a neutral statement while the alternative hypothesis can...
Improving Translational Accuracy
Improving Translational Accuracy
Decision Making: Traditional Method
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is decided based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to this claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses, out of which a null hypothesis would be a...
Predator-Prey Interactions

