Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T16:59:48.630Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

334 Web-based Methods for Family Health History Collection

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 April 2022

Michelle Nguyen
Affiliation:
Johns Hopkins University, School of Medicine
Joao Sedoc
Affiliation:
Johns Hopkins University, School of Medicine
Casey Overby Taylor
Affiliation:
Johns Hopkins University, School of Medicine
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Family health history is widely recognized as an important step of genetic counseling; however, <50% of adults collect family health history due to implementation gaps such as suboptimal collection tools. Our objective is to create KIT, an interactive chatbot to administer a family history survey in comparison to a form-based data collection tool. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Both family health history collection tools were designed by adapting the NIH All of Us Research Family History Survey. The study population consists of 1000 individuals recruited from the crowdsourcing platforms, subreddits r/Health, r/SampleSize, and r/GeneticCounseling and Amazon Mechanical Turk. Eligible participants must be U.S. adults who know at least two first-degree relatives with at least one condition. Study participants are randomized to interact with either tool and complete a survey that measures the usability, engagement, accuracy, and impact of the two data collection strategies. We will use an independent t-test to compare differences in our outcome variables between the two family health history collection tools with demographic variables as covariates. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The hypothesis of this study is that KIT will be more usable, more engaging, with similar accuracy in comparison to form-based tools, which are currently being used for family healthy history collection at low rates. The primary outcome of this study is usability, which will be measured based on standardized surveys. Secondary metrics of this study include engagement, accuracy, and impact. Engagement metrics include time to completion and number of resource link clicks. To assess accuracy and impact, we have included survey questions about the quality of the final summary report provided by both tools. Additionally, we ask users to rank areas for design feature improvement and feature importance; these features were determined by shared-decision-making concepts. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: This study provides recommendations for design features important for the usability, engagement, and impact of future family health history collection tools. With a more usable and engaging tool, we can maximize rates of collection and support both patients and genetic counselors by ensuring features align with shared-decision-making frameworks.

Type
Valued Approaches
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. The Association for Clinical and Translational Science