Aromatase Inhibitors and Weight Loss in Severely Obese Men With Hypogonadism
NCT03490513
Body Weight, Endocrine System Diseases
Houston, Texas, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT Number: NCT04733274
Technologic advances (i.e. next generation sequencing technologies and novel bioinformatics approaches) have been drivers of scientific discovery and have deepened our understanding of the genetics and genomics of health and disease. In parallel, the falling cost of sequencing has led to screening moving from specialty clinics into the primary care setting. However, our ability to help patients and families understand these technologies and related genetic health literacy issues lag behind. These factors pose a number of questions and challenges for clinicians including: how can we best present complex genetic/genomic information to patients to ensure that patients understand the information and can make informed decisions? What are the specific information and support needs of patients and families to be able to make decisions that are in line with their values? In collaboration with investigators from the Harvard Reproductive Endocrine Sciences Center at the Massachusetts General Hospital, this project broadly aims to examine patient understanding and factors affecting decisions surrounding genetic testing. Using the paradigm of a rare genetic disorder (isolated gonadotropin releasing hormone [GnRH] deficiency - hypogonadotropic hypogonadism/Kallmann syndrome [HH/KS]) we will examine the views and perspectives of patients and healthcare professionals alike regarding genetic/genomic information and testing with the intention of identifying patient-centered responses to these unmet needs and challenges.
This study is active but is not currently recruiting participants.
18 year–70 year
All sexes
Observational
Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
The focus of this study is to better understand perspectives on genetic testing. The study will collect and analyze both quantitative and qualitative data form healthcare professionals as well as patients. Findings will be used to inform more person-centered approaches to genetic testing that will support high-quality decisions that are informed and aligned with patient values and preferences. To achieve this, the study has three specific aims.
Aim 1. Evaluate the understandability and acceptability of education materials (including information on genetic testing) co-created with patients.
Patient education materials will be created drawing on healthcare professionals expertise (i.e. content experts) and patients (i.e. lived experience). Quality of materials will be quantitatively measured using the gold standard Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT).
Aim 2. Identify the central elements for a patient decision aid using expert clinician opinion.
Healthcare professionals who are content experts in the field will be surveyed to determine key information for a proposed genetic testing decision aid. Quantitative findings will guide the content of a patient decision aid for genetic testing.
Aim 3. Explore patient needs for information and support related to genetic testing.
Qualitative focus groups with patients will be conducted and analyzed using thematic analysis. Findings will inform the development of a patient decision aid for genetic testing that is responsive to the aspects which matter most to patients.
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Time frame: 1-hour post-test
Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT): higher scores indicate materials that are more readily understood and actionable by patients
Time frame: baseline
survey with Likert-type scale questions: higher scores indicate a perceived higher priority for respective items/topic matter
Time frame: baseline
Qualitative focus group findings (thematic analysis) - open ended questions will probe the nature of experiences with genetic testing as well as perceived promoters and barriers to testing and sharing results with potentially at-risk blood relatives
Time frame: baseline
similarities/differences in face-to-face vs. virtual focus groups - emergent themes form face-to-face and virtual focus groups will be compared to identify similarities/differences in the type and quantity of elicited codes
Boston College
Other
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT03490513
Body Weight, Endocrine System Diseases
Houston, Texas, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT06691815
Constitutional Delay in Growth and Puberty (CDGP), Endocrine System Diseases
Buenos Aires, Argentina
View Trial DetailsNCT05971836
Congenital Abnormalities, Congenital, Hereditary, and Neonatal Diseases and Abnormalities
Boston, Massachusetts, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT00914823
Adnexal Diseases, Brain Diseases
Boston, Massachusetts, United States
View Trial Details