Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: JMIR mHealth and uHealth

Date Submitted: Nov 7, 2017
Open Peer Review Period: Nov 7, 2017 - Jun 29, 2018
Date Accepted: Sep 10, 2018
(closed for review but you can still tweet)

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Better Ask Than Tell: Responses to mHealth Interrogative Reminders and Associations With Colorectal Cancer Screening Subsequent Uptake in a Prospective Cohort Intervention

Hagoel L, Stein N, Rennert G, Neter E

Better Ask Than Tell: Responses to mHealth Interrogative Reminders and Associations With Colorectal Cancer Screening Subsequent Uptake in a Prospective Cohort Intervention

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2019;7(1):e9351

DOI: 10.2196/mhealth.9351

PMID: 30664486

PMCID: 6360382

Better Ask Than Tell: Responses to mHealth Interrogative Reminders and Associations With Colorectal Cancer Screening Subsequent Uptake in a Prospective Cohort Intervention

  • Lea Hagoel; 
  • Nili Stein; 
  • Gad Rennert; 
  • Efrat Neter

ABSTRACT

Background:

Text message (short message service, SMS) interrogative reminders were adopted in population screening for the early detection of colorectal cancer (CRC).

Objective:

This study aims to examine responses to text message (SMS) reminders and associate responses with senders’ characteristics, message type (interrogative/declarative), and subsequent screening uptake.

Methods:

We conducted a prospective cohort intervention. Text message (SMS) reminders to undergo CRC screening, randomized into interrogative and declarative phrasing, were sent to nonadherent 40,000 women and men (age 50-74 years) at CRC average risk. We analyzed recipient responses by message phrasing, recipient characteristics, and for content, the latter predicting subsequent CRC screening per program database.

Results:

While interrogative text message (SMS) reminders elicited 7.67% (1475/19,227) responses, declarative ones elicited 0.76% (146/19,262) responses. Text message (SMS) responses were content analyzed and grouped into attitudes toward CRC screening (1237/1512, 81.8% positive) and intention to screen (1004/1512, 62.6%). Text message (SMS) respondents screened significantly more than nonrespondents after 6 months (415/1621, 25.6% vs 3322/36,868, 9.0%; χ12=487.5, P<.001); 1 year (340/1621, 21.0% vs 4711/36,868; χ12=91.5, P<.001); and 2 years (225/1621, 13.9% vs 3924/36,868; χ12=16.9, P<.001) following the reminders. In a multivariable logistic regression among text message (SMS) respondents, screening after 6 months was significantly predicted by older age, past sporadic screening, attitudes, and intentions.

Conclusions:

Interrogative text message (SMS) reminders reached previously uninvolved sectors in the CRC target population—men, sporadic-screenees, and the “never-tested” before. This novel application resulted in a population-level, incrementally enhanced screening. Asking patients about their future health behavior may be relevant for enhancing other health behaviors in preventive medicine and clinical settings.


 Citation

Please cite as:

Hagoel L, Stein N, Rennert G, Neter E

Better Ask Than Tell: Responses to mHealth Interrogative Reminders and Associations With Colorectal Cancer Screening Subsequent Uptake in a Prospective Cohort Intervention

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2019;7(1):e9351

DOI: 10.2196/mhealth.9351

PMID: 30664486

PMCID: 6360382

Per the author's request the PDF is not available.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.