Development of a Patient Decision Aid for the DAHANCA 35 Proton Radiotherapy Trial: An Iterative Development Process with User-Centered Design Elements.

IF 1.7 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
MDM Policy and Practice Pub Date : 2026-04-30 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.1177/23814683261441513
Anne Wilhøft Kristensen, Annesofie Lunde Jensen, Kenneth Jensen, Susanne Oksbjerg Dalton, Jeppe Friborg, Cai Grau, Hilary L Bekker
{"title":"Development of a Patient Decision Aid for the DAHANCA 35 Proton Radiotherapy Trial: An Iterative Development Process with User-Centered Design Elements.","authors":"Anne Wilhøft Kristensen, Annesofie Lunde Jensen, Kenneth Jensen, Susanne Oksbjerg Dalton, Jeppe Friborg, Cai Grau, Hilary L Bekker","doi":"10.1177/23814683261441513","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background.</b> Deciding whether to participate in a radiotherapy trial is complex for patients with head and neck cancer. Standard patient information leaflets meet ethical requirements but do not provide balanced comparisons, value clarification, or structured decision support. Few patient decision aids (PtDAs) have been developed for clinical trial participation. <b>Objective.</b> To develop a PtDA to support decisions about participation in a randomized trial comparing proton versus photon radiotherapy (DAHANCA 35). <b>Methods.</b> Following the Medical Research Council framework for complex interventions, an iterative development process incorporating elements of user-centered design was undertaken, informed by the Ottawa Decision Support Framework (ODSF), International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS), and Measure of User- and Human-Centred Design for Personal Health Tools (UCD-11). Five steps were conducted: 1) scoping informed by 3 preceding studies and a workshop with clinicians, 2) drafting of an initial prototype, 3) iterative refinement in a multidisciplinary development group, 4) alpha testing using think-aloud interviews with patients (<i>n</i> = 5) and clinicians (<i>n</i> = 8), and 5) finalization. Data from workshops, written feedback, group discussions, and interviews informed revisions. <b>Results.</b> The final iteration of the PtDA provides balanced, plain-language information; value clarification; and decision support regarding participation in DAHANCA 35, including an explicit presentation of the decision between standard photon radiotherapy and the trial option. Visual elements, a comparison table, a decision tree, and tools from the Ottawa Personal Decision Guide were integrated to support comprehension and deliberation. Alpha testing confirmed usability and informed refinements that improved clarity and navigation. <b>Conclusions.</b> This iterative development process, incorporating elements of user-centered design, resulted in a PtDA that addressed decision-making needs within the trial context. Future research will assess the feasibility and implementation of this approach. The development approach may serve as a foundation for adapting PtDAs to other radiotherapy clinical trials.</p><p><strong>Highlights: </strong>A patient decision aid (PtDA) was developed to support individuals with head and neck cancer in deciding whether to participate in a proton radiotherapy trial.The PtDA was developed through an iterative, theory-informed, and user-centered process with input from clinicians and trial-eligible patients.The PtDA provides structured, balanced information and explicit comparisons between standard photon radiotherapy and the trial option.This development approach may be adapted to support decision making in other radiotherapy trials and clinical trial contexts.</p>","PeriodicalId":36567,"journal":{"name":"MDM Policy and Practice","volume":"11 1","pages":"23814683261441513"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13153567/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MDM Policy and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23814683261441513","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background. Deciding whether to participate in a radiotherapy trial is complex for patients with head and neck cancer. Standard patient information leaflets meet ethical requirements but do not provide balanced comparisons, value clarification, or structured decision support. Few patient decision aids (PtDAs) have been developed for clinical trial participation. Objective. To develop a PtDA to support decisions about participation in a randomized trial comparing proton versus photon radiotherapy (DAHANCA 35). Methods. Following the Medical Research Council framework for complex interventions, an iterative development process incorporating elements of user-centered design was undertaken, informed by the Ottawa Decision Support Framework (ODSF), International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS), and Measure of User- and Human-Centred Design for Personal Health Tools (UCD-11). Five steps were conducted: 1) scoping informed by 3 preceding studies and a workshop with clinicians, 2) drafting of an initial prototype, 3) iterative refinement in a multidisciplinary development group, 4) alpha testing using think-aloud interviews with patients (n = 5) and clinicians (n = 8), and 5) finalization. Data from workshops, written feedback, group discussions, and interviews informed revisions. Results. The final iteration of the PtDA provides balanced, plain-language information; value clarification; and decision support regarding participation in DAHANCA 35, including an explicit presentation of the decision between standard photon radiotherapy and the trial option. Visual elements, a comparison table, a decision tree, and tools from the Ottawa Personal Decision Guide were integrated to support comprehension and deliberation. Alpha testing confirmed usability and informed refinements that improved clarity and navigation. Conclusions. This iterative development process, incorporating elements of user-centered design, resulted in a PtDA that addressed decision-making needs within the trial context. Future research will assess the feasibility and implementation of this approach. The development approach may serve as a foundation for adapting PtDAs to other radiotherapy clinical trials.

Highlights: A patient decision aid (PtDA) was developed to support individuals with head and neck cancer in deciding whether to participate in a proton radiotherapy trial.The PtDA was developed through an iterative, theory-informed, and user-centered process with input from clinicians and trial-eligible patients.The PtDA provides structured, balanced information and explicit comparisons between standard photon radiotherapy and the trial option.This development approach may be adapted to support decision making in other radiotherapy trials and clinical trial contexts.

DAHANCA 35质子放疗试验患者决策辅助工具的开发:以用户为中心设计元素的迭代开发过程。
背景。对于头颈癌患者来说,决定是否参加放疗试验是一件复杂的事情。标准的患者信息传单符合伦理要求,但不能提供平衡的比较、价值澄清或结构化的决策支持。很少有患者决策辅助工具(ptda)被开发用于临床试验参与。目标。制定PtDA以支持参与比较质子与光子放射治疗的随机试验的决策(DAHANCA 35)。方法。根据医学研究理事会复杂干预措施框架,在渥太华决策支持框架(ODSF)、国际患者决策援助标准(IPDAS)和以用户和人为中心的个人健康工具设计措施(UCD-11)的指导下,开展了一个包含以用户为中心的设计要素的迭代开发过程。共进行了五个步骤:1)根据之前的3项研究和与临床医生的研讨会确定范围,2)起草初始原型,3)在多学科开发小组中进行迭代改进,4)通过对患者(n = 5)和临床医生(n = 8)的思考访谈进行alpha测试,5)最终确定。来自研讨会、书面反馈、小组讨论和访谈的数据为修订提供了信息。结果。PtDA的最终迭代提供平衡的、简单的语言信息;价值澄清;以及关于参加DAHANCA 35的决策支持,包括在标准光子放疗和试验选择之间的决策的明确介绍。视觉元素、比较表、决策树和渥太华个人决策指南的工具被整合在一起,以支持理解和审议。Alpha测试确认了可用性,并改进了清晰度和导航。结论。这个迭代的开发过程,结合了以用户为中心的设计元素,产生了一个PtDA,解决了试验环境中的决策需求。未来的研究将评估这种方法的可行性和实施。该开发方法可作为ptda适应其他放疗临床试验的基础。患者决策辅助(PtDA)的开发是为了支持头颈癌患者决定是否参加质子放疗试验。PtDA是在临床医生和符合试验条件的患者的输入下,通过反复、理论和以用户为中心的过程开发的。PtDA提供了结构化的、平衡的信息和标准光子放疗与试验选择之间的明确比较。这种发展方法可能适用于支持其他放疗试验和临床试验背景下的决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
MDM Policy and Practice
MDM Policy and Practice Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
28
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书