Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 5, 2026

E-Patient Counseling Trial (E-PACO): Computer Based Education versus Nurse Counseling for Patients to Prepare for Colonoscopy
Published on: August 1, 2019
Improving Critical Appraisal of Cancer-Related Health Information: A Pilot Randomised Trial of the Informed Health
Mengqi Li1,2,3, Marie Tierney1,2,4, Claire Beecher1,2,4
1School of Nursing & Midwifery, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland.
Background:
People impacted by cancer may be confronted with conflicting and misleading cancer-related information that is everywhere in daily life. The Informed Health Choices-Cancer (IHC-C) programme was developed to equip participants with the skills and knowledge necessary to think critically and make well-informed health choices.
Aims:
To assess the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary outcomes of the IHC-C programme.
Methods:
We conducted an online pilot randomised trial to compare the IHC-C programme with a waitlist control within a prespecified recruitment window. Adults impacted by cancer (current patients, survivors, informal caregivers and loved ones) were recruited and randomised 1:1. The intervention was a 4-week, nine-unit online learning programme. Primary outcomes assessed feasibility (recruitment, retention, adherence, technical feasibility, and data-collection processes) and acceptability (participation rates, participation burden, and overall acceptability). Secondary outcomes included eHealth literacy, critical thinking and decision-making skills, which were assessed post-intervention.
Results:
Forty-three participants were randomised (22 intervention; 21 waitlist control), achieving 72% of the recruitment target. In the intervention group, 91% accessed the platform and 64% completed all nine units. Outcome assessment completion was 64% (14/22) in the intervention group and 81% (17/21) in the control group. Acceptability was high among intervention completers, as indicated by both quantitative and qualitative measures. eHealth literacy scores were high in both groups, with ceiling effects and no between-group difference (Hodges-Lehmann median difference -1.0, 95% CI -5.0 to 1.0). Critical thinking and decision-making quiz scores were higher in the intervention group in exploratory analyses (median difference: 1.0, 95% CI: 1.0-2.0), although the distributions clustered near the upper range.
Conclusions:
The IHC-C programme was feasible to deliver and acceptable to participants within a defined recruitment period. These findings support progression to a fully powered trial, with refinements to engagement strategies and outcome measurement.
Trial Registration:
This trial was registered on ISRCTN registry with ID ISRCTN17391470.
Related Concept Videos
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
Cancer Prevention
Some...
Cancer Survival Analysis
Nursing Ethical Principles II
Consider the following scenario, which illustrates how these principles are applied in the care of Mr. John, a fifty-year-old teacher diagnosed with metastatic liver cancer.
Initially, Mr. John's cancer...
Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
Levels of Health Promotion and Illness Prevention
In primary prevention, actions taken before disease onset prevent the disease from...