Engaging Patients in Decisions About Cancer Screening: Exploring the Decision Journey Through the Use of a Patient Portal.

INTRODUCTION: Engaging patients to make informed choices is paramount but difficult in busy practices. This study sought to engage patients outside the clinical setting to better understand how they approach cancer screening decisions, including their primary concerns and their preferences for finalizing their decision. METHODS: Twelve primary care practices offering patients an online personal health record invited eligible patients to complete a 17-item online interactive module. Among 11,458 registered users, invitations to complete the module were sent to adults aged 50-74 years who were overdue for colorectal cancer screening and to women aged 40-49 years and men aged 55-69 who had not undergone a recent mammogram or prostate-specific antigen test, respectively. RESULTS: The module was started by 2,355 patients and completed by 903 patients. Most respondents (76.8%) knew they were eligible for screening. Preferred next steps were talking to the clinician (76.6%), reading/research (28.6%), and consulting trusted friends/family (16.4%). Priority topics included how much screening improves life expectancy, comparative test performance, and the prevalence/health risks of the cancer. Leading fears were getting cancer/delayed detection (79.2%), abnormal results (40.5%), and testing complications (39.1%), the last referring to false test results, medical complications, or unnecessary treatments. Men eligible for prostate-specific antigen screening were more likely than women eligible for mammography to express concerns about testing complications and to prioritize weighing pros and cons over gut feelings (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Although this sample was predisposed to screening, most patients wanted help in finalizing their decision. Many wanted to weigh the pros and cons and expressed fears of potential harms from screening. Understanding how patients approach decisions may help design more effective engagement strategies.

Education and patient preferences for treating type 2 diabetes: a stratified discrete-choice experiment.

PURPOSE: Diabetes is a chronic condition that is more prevalent among people with lower educational attainment. This study assessed the treatment preferences of patients with type 2 diabetes by educational attainment. METHODS: Patients with type 2 diabetes were recruited from a national online panel in the US. Treatment preferences were assessed using a discrete-choice experiment. Participants completed 16 choice tasks in which they compared pairs of treatment profiles composed of six attributes: A1c decrease, stable blood glucose, low blood glucose, nausea, treatment burden, and out-of-pocket cost. Choice models and willingness-to-pay (WTP) estimates were estimated using a conditional logit model and were stratified by educational status. RESULTS: A total of 231 participants with a high school diploma or less education, 156 participants with some college education, and 165 participants with a college degree or more completed the survey. Participants with a college degree or more education were willing to pay more for A1c decreases ($58.84, standard error [SE]: 10.6) than participants who had completed some college ($28.47, SE: 5.53) or high school or less ($17.56, SE: 3.55) (p≤0.01). People with a college education were willing to pay more than people with high school or less to avoid nausea, low blood glucose events during the day/night, or two pills per day. CONCLUSION: WTP for aspects of diabetes medication differed for people with a college education or more and a high school education or less. Advanced statistical methods might overcome limitations of stratification and advance understanding of preference heterogeneity for use in patient-centered benefit-risk assessments and personalized care approaches.

Engaging Patients in Decision-Making and Behavior Change to Promote Prevention.

Effectively engaging patients in their care is essential to improve health outcomes, improve satisfaction with the care experience, reduce costs, and even benefit the clinician experience. This chapter will address the topic of patient engagement directly and review the relationships between health literacy and patient engagement. While there are many ways to define patient and family engagement, this chapter will consider engagement as "patients, families, their representatives, and health professionals working in active partnership at various levels across the health care system - direct care, organizational design and governance, and policy making - to improve health and health care [1]." We will specifically focus on the patient engagement and health literacy needs for three scenarios (1) decision-making, (2) health behavior change, and (3) chronic disease management; we will include the theoretical underpinnings of engagement, the systems required to better support patient engagement, how social determinants of health influence patient engagement, and practical examples to demonstrate approaches to better engage patients in their health and wellbeing. We will close by describing the future of patient engagement, which extends beyond the traditional domains of decision-making and self-care to describe how patient engagement can influence the design of the healthcare delivery system; local, state, and national health policies; and future research relevant to the needs and experiences of patients.

Identifying and Prioritizing the Barriers and Facilitators to the Self-Management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Community-Centered Approach.

OBJECTIVE: Self-management of type 2 diabetes mellitus is crucial to controlling the disease and preventing harm. Multiple factors have been identified in the literature as potential barriers and facilitators to self-management, but the magnitude and directionality of these factors are seldom studied. We sought to develop and test an instrument to identify and quantify the barriers and facilitators to self-management of type 2 diabetes. METHODS: A community-centered approach was used to design, implement, and interpret the results of a stated-preference study. All activities were guided by a diverse stakeholder board. Based on previously reported development work, a novel survey instrument consisting of 13 potential barriers and facilitators was pretested and piloted in our local community. Participants were asked to discuss, rate, and rank each factor. A simple self-explicated method was used to quantify the data and Z scores were used for hypothesis testing. RESULTS: In total, 25 patients with self-reported type 2 diabetes (64% female; 92% minorities) participated in the pretest and pilot. Time commitments (Z = -3.72), lack of active support groups (Z = -3.39) and other resources in the local community (Z = -2.96), and language/culture (Z = -2.69) were identified as barriers to self-management. Access to healthy food (Z = +5.68), personal understanding (Z = +4.81), and communication with healthcare providers (Z = +4.62) were identified as facilitators. CONCLUSION: We demonstrate that factors impacting self-management can be quantified and categorized as barriers and facilitators. While further refinement to some factors and investigation into alternative prioritization methods is necessary, our stakeholder board endorsed moving this to a large nationally representative study to see how these factors vary across different people.

Socioeconomic and Demographic Disparities in Caregiving Intensity and Quality of Life in Informal Caregivers: A First Look at the National Study of Caregiving.

Informal caregiving is an integral component of the health care system, saving the national economy more than $522 billion annually. The current study examined how the association between caregiving intensity and caregiver quality of life varies by sociodemographic factors through a secondary analysis of the National Study of Caregiving. Generalized linear models assessed the associations among four aspects of caregiving intensity, three aspects of caregiver quality of life, and key sociodemographic factors. Compared to White individuals, Black individuals had higher levels of overall caregiving intensity (ß = 0.293, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.140, 0.447]), number of instrumental activities of daily living performed (ß = 0.060, 95% CI [0.030, 0.090]), and hours spent caregiving per month (ß = 0.025, 95% CI [0.002, 0.049]), yet experienced significantly fewer negative impacts on quality of life. Understanding how informal caregiving affects caregiver quality of life is critical to inform public health policies and programs designed to support caregivers and protect this critical component of the U.S. health care system. [Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 43(6), 17-24.].

Coping With Prediagnosis Symptoms of Colorectal Cancer: A Study of 244 Individuals With Recent Diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) symptoms are often vague and vary in severity, intensity, type, and timing. Receipt of medical care is dependent on symptom recognition and assessment, which may impede timely diagnosis. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe and categorize how CRC patients coped with symptoms prior to seeking medical care, examine sociodemographic differences in these coping strategies, and determine the strategies associated with time to seek medical care and overall time to diagnosis. METHODS: Two hundred forty-four white and African American patients in Virginia and Ohio who received a diagnosis of CRC and who experienced symptoms prior to diagnosis were administered a semistructured interview and the Brief COPE questionnaire. RESULTS: Eighty-three percent used more than 1 coping strategy. Common symptom-specific coping strategies were to "wait-and-see," self-treat, and rationalize symptoms. Males were more likely to wait and see (P < .001); African Americans and Medicaid recipients were more likely to self-treat via lifestyle changes (P's < .01). Younger individuals (<50 years old) had higher Brief COPE reframing, planning, and humor scores; those with lower education and income had higher denial scores (P's < .01). Using more symptom-specific coping strategies and engaging in avoidance/denial were associated with longer time to seek medical care and overall time to diagnosis (P's < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Individuals experiencing CRC symptoms use multiple, diverse coping strategies that are influenced by sociodemographic characteristics. Denial is particularly relevant for delay in seeking care and timely diagnosis. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Public health campaigns could focus on secondary prevention of CRC by targeting at-risk groups such as males, African Americans, or Medicaid recipients, who choose waiting or self-treatment in response to initial symptoms.

Perceived Barriers and Potential Strategies to Improve Self-Management Among Adults with Type 2 Diabetes: A Community-Engaged Research Approach.

OBJECTIVE: Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality that disproportionately affects adults living in urban areas in the USA. Our goal was to actively engage community members in research to identify strategies to improve T2D self-management in an urban community in Baltimore, MD. METHODS: We partnered with the Johns Hopkins Community Research Advisory Council to establish our stakeholder advisory board-the Diabetes Action Board (DAB). In response to input from DAB members regarding the best approaches for conducting community-centered T2D research, we conducted three 90-min focus groups of local adults living with T2D to identify ways to improve self-management. DAB members were involved in each stage of the research, including development of the protocol and materials, participant recruitment, and interpretation and dissemination of findings. RESULTS: In total, 24 adults with self-reported T2D (75 % participation rate; 79 % female) residing in the local area participated in focus groups. Participants reported that barriers within their daily home and work environments, inadequate neighborhood resources, and suboptimal healthcare quality hindered their self-management. Reported strategies that may help to improve self-management included social support from family members, providers, and community members; improved access to healthy food; and wide availability of free or low-cost T2D educational materials and classes within the local area. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates a successful mechanism for engaging community members in the design, implementation, and dissemination of T2D research. This research approach was beneficial for building a sustainable partnership to support future work in the local community.

A Qualitative Study of Vulnerable Patient Views of Type 2 Diabetes Consumer Reports.

BACKGROUND: The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) mandates the release of publicly available consumer reports to highlight differences in quality of care and reduce healthcare disparities. However, little is known about patient perceptions of the value of such reports. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify whether vulnerable populations with type 2 diabetes perceive consumer reports as helpful in making decisions about diabetes care. METHODS: We conducted a brief demographic survey and qualitative study of 18 focus groups: six each of African American, Hispanic, and non-Hispanic White consumers diagnosed with type 2 diabetes (n = 92). We analysed focus group transcripts to identify recurring themes, which were summarized and compared across population groups. RESULTS: Participants expressed minimal interest in currently available consumer reports. They instead listed personal referrals and interpersonal interactions among the most important factors when choosing a physician. Further, in place of information to aid in physician selection, participants articulated strong desires for more basic, straightforward disease-specific information that would promote diabetes self-management. CONCLUSIONS: This study's results call into question the value of consumer reports as defined by the ACA. Participants reported little interest in comparative provider performance data. Instead, they were more interested in information to assist in diabetes self-management. This suggests that consumer reports may not be as important a tool to improve outcomes and reduce health disparities as policy makers imagine them to be.

MyPreventiveCare: implementation and dissemination of an interactive preventive health record in three practice-based research networks serving disadvantaged patients--a randomized cluster trial.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based preventive services for early detection of cancer and other health conditions offer profound health benefits, yet Americans receive only half of indicated services. Policy initiatives promote the adoption of information technologies to engage patients in care. We developed a theory-driven interactive preventive health record (IPHR) to engage patients in health promotion. The model defines five levels of functionality: (1) collecting patient information, (2) integrating with electronic health records (EHRs), (3) translating information into lay language, (4) providing individualized, guideline-based clinical recommendations, and (5) facilitating patient action. It is hypothesized that personal health records (PHRs) with these higher levels of functionality will inform and activate patients in ways that simpler PHRs cannot. However, realizing this vision requires both technological advances and effective implementation based upon clinician and practice engagement. METHODS/DESIGN: We are starting a two-phase, mixed-method trial to evaluate whether the IPHR is scalable across a large number of practices and how its uptake differs for minority and disadvantaged patients. In phase 1, 40 practices from three practice-based research networks will be randomized to add IPHR functionality to their PHR versus continue to use their existing PHR. Throughout the study, we will engage intervention practices to locally tailor IPHR content and learn how to integrate new functions into their practice workflow. In phase 2, the IPHR to all nonintervention practices to observe whether the IPHR can be implemented more broadly (Scalability). Phase 1 will feature an implementation assessment in intervention practices, based on the RE-AIM model, to measure Reach (creation of IPHR accounts by patients), Adoption (practice decision to use the IPHR), Implementation (consistency, fidelity, barriers, and facilitators of use), and Maintenance (sustained use). The incremental effect of the IPHR on receipt of cancer screening tests and shared decision-making compared to traditional PHRs will assess Effectiveness. In phase 2, we will assess similar outcomes as phase 1 except for effectiveness. DISCUSSION: This study will yield information about the effectiveness of new health information technologies designed to actively engage patients in their care as well as information about how to effectively implement and disseminate PHRs by engaging clinicians. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02138448.

Engaging primary care patients to use a patient-centered personal health record.

PURPOSE: Health care leaders encourage clinicians to offer portals that enable patients to access personal health records, but implementation has been a challenge. Although large integrated health systems have promoted use through costly advertising campaigns, other implementation methods are needed for small to medium-sized practices where most patients receive their care. METHODS: We conducted a mixed methods assessment of a proactive implementation strategy for a patient portal (an interactive preventive health record [IPHR]) offered by 8 primary care practices. The practices implemented a series of learning collaboratives with practice champions and redesigned workflow to integrate portal use into care. Practice implementation strategies, portal use, and factors influencing use were assessed prospectively. RESULTS: A proactive and customized implementation strategy designed by practices resulted in 25.6% of patients using the IPHR, with the rate increasing 1.0% per month over 31 months. Fully 23.5% of IPHR users signed up within 1 day of their office visit. Older patients and patients with comorbidities were more likely to use the IPHR, but blacks and Hispanics were less likely. Older age diminished as a factor after adjusting for comorbidities. Implementation by practice varied considerably (from 22.1% to 27.9%, P <.001) based on clinician characteristics and workflow innovations adopted by practices to enhance uptake. CONCLUSIONS: By directly engaging patients to use a portal and supporting practices to integrate use into care, primary care practices can match or potentially surpass the usage rates achieved by large health systems.

Are researcher development interventions, alone or in any combination, effective in improving researcher behavior? A systematic review.

Academic institutions funded by the Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) Program of the National Institutes of Health were challenged recently by the Institute of Medicine to expand traditional mentoring of graduate and postdoctoral scholars to include training and continuing education for faculty, professional staff, and community partners. A systematic review was conducted to determine whether researcher development interventions, alone or in any combination, are effective in improving researcher behavior. PubMed, CINAHL, and Education Research Complete databases and select journals were searched for relevant articles published from January 2000 through October 2012. A total of 3,459 papers were identified, and 114 papers were retrieved for in-depth analysis. None included randomization. Twenty-two papers reported subjects with professional degrees, interventions, and outcomes. Interventions were meetings, outreach visits, colleague mediation, audit and feedback, and multifaceted interventions. Most studies reported multifaceted interventions (68.2%), often involving mentored learning experiences, and meetings. All studies reported a change in performance, including numbers of publications or grant applications. Nine studies reported changes in competence, including writing, presentation, or analytic skills, and performance in research practice (40.9%). Even as, the quality of evidence was weak to establish causal linkages between researcher development and improved researcher behavior, nearly all the projects (81.8%) received funding from governmental agencies, professional societies, or other organizations. Those who design researcher development activities and those who evaluate the programs are challenged to develop tools and conduct studies that measure the effectiveness, costs, and sustainability of researcher development in the CTSA Program.

How patients want to engage with their personal health record: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess factors related to use and non-use of a sophisticated interactive preventive health record (IPHR) designed to promote uptake of 18 recommended clinical preventive services; little is known about how patients want to use or be engaged by such advanced information tools. DESIGN: Descriptive and interpretive qualitative analysis of transcripts and field notes from focus groups of the IPHR users and of patients who were invited but did not use the IPHR (non-users). Grounded theory techniques were then applied via an editing approach for key emergent themes. SETTING: Primary care patients in eight practices of the Virginia Ambulatory Care Outcomes Research Network (ACORN). PARTICIPANTS: Three focus groups involved a total of 14 IPHR users and two groups of non-users totalled 14 participants. OUTCOMES/RESULTS: For themes identified (relevance, trust and functionality) participants indicated that endorsement and use of the IPHR by their personal clinician was vital. In particular, participants' comments linked the IPHR use to: (1) integrating the IPHR into current care, (2) promoting effective patient-clinician encounters and communication and (3) their confidence in the accuracy, security and privacy of the information. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to patients' stated desires for advanced functionality and information accuracy and privacy, successful adoption of the IPHRs by primary care patients depends on such technology's relevance, and on its promotion via integration with primary care practices' processes and the patient-clinician relationship. Accordingly, models of technological success and adoption, when applied to primary care, may need to include the patient-clinician relationship and practice workflow. These findings are important for healthcare providers, the information technology industry and policymakers who share an interest in encouraging patients to use personal health records. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00589173.

Interactive preventive health record to enhance delivery of recommended care: a randomized trial.

PURPOSE: Americans receive only one-half of recommended preventive services. Information technologies have been advocated to engage patients. We tested the effectiveness of an interactive preventive health record (IPHR) that links patients to their clinician's record, explains information in lay language, displays tailored recommendations and educational resources, and generates reminders. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial involved 8 primary care practices. Four thousand five hundred patients were randomly selected to receive a mailed invitation to use the IPHR or usual care. Outcomes were measured using patient surveys and electronic medical record data and included IPHR use and service delivery. Comparisons were made between invited and usual-care patients and between users and nonusers among those invited to use the IPHR. RESULTS: At 4 and 16 months, 229 (10.2%) and 378 (16.8%) of invited patients used the IPHR. The proportion of patients up-to-date with all services increased between baseline and 16 months by 3.8% among intervention patients (from 11.4% to 15.2%, P <.001) and by 1.5% among control patients (from 11.1% to 12.6%, P = .07), a difference of 2.3% (P = .05). Greater increases were observed among patients who used the IPHR. At 16 months, 25.1% of users were up-to-date with all services, double the rate among nonusers. At 4 months, delivery of colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer screening increased by 19%, 15%, and 13%, respectively, among users. CONCLUSIONS: Information systems that feature patient-centered functionality, such as the IPHR, have potential to increase preventive service delivery. Engaging more patients to use systems could have important public health benefits.

Internet use for prediagnosis symptom appraisal by colorectal cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: This study explored the characteristics of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients who accessed Internet-based health information as part of their symptom appraisal process prior to consulting a health care provider. METHOD: Newly diagnosed CRC patients who experienced symptoms prior to diagnosis were interviewed. Brief COPE was used to measure patient coping. Logistic and linear regressions were used to assess Internet use and appraisal delay. RESULTS: Twenty-five percent of the sample (61/242) consulted the Internet prior to visiting a health care provider. Internet use was associated with having private health insurance (odds ratio [OR] = 2.55; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.20-5.43) and experiencing elimination symptoms (OR = 1.43; 95% CI = 1.14-1.80) and was marginally associated with age (OR = 0.96; 95% CI = 0.93-0.99). Internet use was not related to delayed medical care seeking. CONCLUSION: Internet use did not influence decisions to seek medical care. The Internet provided a preliminary information resource for individuals who experienced embarrassing CRC symptoms, had private health insurance, and were younger.

Designing a patient-centered personal health record to promote preventive care.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based preventive services offer profound health benefits, yet Americans receive only half of indicated care. A variety of government and specialty society policy initiatives are promoting the adoption of information technologies to engage patients in their care, such as personal health records, but current systems may not utilize the technology's full potential. METHODS: Using a previously described model to make information technology more patient-centered, we developed an interactive preventive health record (IPHR) designed to more deeply engage patients in preventive care and health promotion. We recruited 14 primary care practices to promote the IPHR to all adult patients and sought practice and patient input in designing the IPHR to ensure its usability, salience, and generalizability. The input involved patient usability tests, practice workflow observations, learning collaboratives, and patient feedback. Use of the IPHR was measured using practice appointment and IPHR databases. RESULTS: The IPHR that emerged from this process generates tailored patient recommendations based on guidelines from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force and other organizations. It extracts clinical data from the practices' electronic medical record and obtains health risk assessment information from patients. Clinical content is translated and explained in lay language. Recommendations review the benefits and uncertainties of services and possible actions for patients and clinicians. Embedded in recommendations are self management tools, risk calculators, decision aids, and community resources--selected to match patient's clinical circumstances. Within six months, practices had encouraged 14.4% of patients to use the IPHR (ranging from 1.5% to 28.3% across the 14 practices). Practices successfully incorporated the IPHR into workflow, using it to prepare patients for visits, augment health behavior counseling, explain test results, automatically issue patient reminders for overdue services, prompt clinicians about needed services, and formulate personalized prevention plans. CONCLUSIONS: The IPHR demonstrates that a patient-centered personal health record that interfaces with the electronic medical record can give patients a high level of individualized guidance and be successfully adopted by busy primary care practices. Further study and refinement are necessary to make information systems even more patient-centered and to demonstrate their impact on care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00589173.

The research mentoring relationship in family medicine: findings from the grant generating project.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Mentoring has been acknowledged as a critical factor in the development of family medicine academicians. Specific aims were to describe the research mentoring in family medicine from the experience of both mentors and protégés and identify characteristics that mentors and protégés associated with a successful mentoring relationship. The Grant Generating Project (GGP) Fellowship, a training and mentoring program for family medicine researchers, provided a natural opportunity to study these issues and better understand what is successful in research mentoring. METHODS: Separate mentor and protégés surveys measured perceptions about the extent of mentoring assistance, perceived relationship success, costs and benefits of the relationship, and the nature and duration of the relationship. Correlations between demographic characteristics and the mentoring relationship were also examined. RESULTS: Mentors were generally professors (78%), male (82%), with a mean age of 53 years, while protégés were assistant professors (53%) and almost evenly divided between male (51%) and female (49%) with mean age of 44 years. Both mentors and protégés describe the mentoring relationship in general to be of benefit to both mentor and protégé. Nonetheless, statistically significant differences between mentor-protégé responses were found for nine of the 20 survey items. Mentors tended to give higher values in their ratings of specific mentor-protégé relationship variables. Significant positive correlations were found between benefit, quality of the relationship, and mentoring assistance and the number of hours per month of mentor-protégé interaction, the number of mentor-protégé meetings per month, and the number of months the mentor worked with the protégé. Mentor-protégé acquaintance before the GGP fellowship was significantly correlated with cost, benefit, and mentoring assistance. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows agreement between mentor and protégé regarding the mentors' ability to promote the protégés, provide important technical skills, convey respect for the protégés, and serve as a friend and role model. Protégés tend to be more connected with their colleagues and with their profession, perhaps in part because the mentoring relationship facilitates networking opportunities provided by the mentor. In particular, excellent mentors can provide protégés with opportunities to meet other influential scholars at conferences and/or through various forms of correspondence. Such relationships can be helpful to the protégé in developing a constellation of mentoring relationships that may result in more successful research careers. Future studies should examine the relationship upon various outcomes.

Issues important to the research mentoring relationship.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Family medicine lacks a critical mass of experienced, federally funded researchers to serve as research mentors for young investigators. The purpose of this study was to identify issues important when mentoring junior investigators. METHODS: Eight experienced primary care investigators, known for their excellence in mentorship, were recruited from the Primary Care Research Methods and Statistics Conference. After participation in a focus group exploring issues related to the quality, techniques, effectiveness, and efficiency of mentorship, subjects completed three rounds of Delphi using variables identified during the focus group to develop a comprehensive, stable list of 72 mentoring strategies. RESULTS: Five items received perfect ratings of agreement: (1) primary task to help protégé identify long-term goals and strategize to meet them, (2) difference exists between mentoring and collaboration, (3) assigning mentor is not a guarantee that the relationship will work, (4) mentor can provide expertise and encouragement but not ensure a desired outcome, and (5) mentor who does not care about the protégé is not likely to be effective. The strategies with which the mentors disagreed included mentor-protégé characteristics and differences. CONCLUSIONS: Mentors emphasized the importance of long-term goals, difference between mentorship and collaboration, and commitment from the mentor.

The advantages and challenges of unannounced standardized patient methodology to assess healthcare communication.

OBJECTIVE: This paper provides an overview of the implementation of using unannounced standardized patients (USPs) to conduct health communication research in clinical settings. METHODS: Certain types of health communication situations are difficult to capture because of their rarity or unpredictable nature. In primary care the real reasons for a visit are frequently unknown until the consultation is well under way. Therefore, it is logistically difficult for communication studies to capture many real-time communications between patients and their physicians. Although the USP methodology is ideal for capturing these communication behaviors, challenges to using this method include developing collaborative relationships with clinical practices, logistical issues such as safeguarding the identity of the USP, training USPs and creating their identities, maintaining fidelity to the role, and analyzing the resultant data. RESULTS: This paper discusses the challenges and solutions to USP implementation. We provide an example of how to implement a USP study using an on-going study being conducted in primary care practices. CONCLUSION: This paper explores the advantages and challenges as well as strategies to overcome obstacles to implementing a USP study. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Despite the challenges, USP methodology can contribute much to our understanding of health communication and practice.

Breast cancer patients' use of health information in decision making and coping.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer patients are some of today's most proactive healthcare consumers. Given how the media has highlighted the many issues involved in breast cancer, the unprecedented rise of consumerism in general, and the rise of healthcare consumerism specifically, a plethora of information on breast cancer has emerged in both scientific and popular media. It is timely and appropriate to consider breast cancer patients' perspectives regarding their search for health-related information and its use for treatment decision making and coping. OBJECTIVE: The present study explores health information-seeking behaviors (passive and active), use of health information, sources of health information, and how such information is or is not used in patients' decision making about their treatment. METHODS: This study used a secondary analysis of data regarding health information-seeking behaviors and treatment decisions from 2 separate but compatible qualitative data sets based on in-depth interviews with a total of 35 breast cancer survivors. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: The majority of participating women were active information seekers (n = 26). Of the subsets of women who described their level of involvement in treatment decision making, the largest number (n = 13) reported a shared responsibility for decision making with their physician, and the next largest subset (n = 9) reported making the final decision themselves. CONCLUSION: These findings provide an enhanced understanding of the preferred source and method of delivery of information given health information-seeking behaviors and decision-making strategies. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: How health information is delivered in the future given these findings is discussed with specific attention to matching patient preferences with delivery methods to potentially enhance patients' sense of agency with regard to treatment, which has been shown to improve patients' psychosocial outcomes.