TY - JOUR
T1 - Developing a digital intervention for cancer survivors
T2 - an evidence-, theory- and person-based approach
AU - Bradbury, Katherine
AU - Steele, Mary
AU - Corbett, Teresa
AU - Geraghty, Adam W. A.
AU - Krusche, Adele
AU - Heber, Elena
AU - Easton, Steph
AU - Cheetham-Blake, Tara
AU - Slodkowska-Barabasz, Joanna
AU - Müller, Andre Matthias
AU - Smith, Kirsten
AU - Wilde, Laura J.
AU - Payne, Liz
AU - Singh, Karmpaul
AU - Bacon, Roger
AU - Burford, Tamsin
AU - Summers, Kevin
AU - Turner, Lesley
AU - Richardson, Alison
AU - Watson, Eila
AU - Foster, Claire
AU - Little, Paul
AU - Yardley, Lucy
PY - 2019/9/2
Y1 - 2019/9/2
N2 - This paper illustrates a rigorous approach to developing digital interventions using an evidence-, theory- and person-based approach. Intervention planning included a rapid scoping review that identified cancer survivors’ needs, including barriers and facilitators to intervention success. Review evidence (N = 49 papers) informed the intervention’s Guiding Principles, theory-based behavioural analysis and logic model. The intervention was optimised based on feedback on a prototype intervention through interviews (N = 96) with cancer survivors and focus groups with NHS staff and cancer charity workers (N = 31). Interviews with cancer survivors highlighted barriers to engagement, such as concerns about physical activity worsening fatigue. Focus groups highlighted concerns about support appointment length and how to support distressed participants. Feedback informed intervention modifications, to maximise acceptability, feasibility and likelihood of behaviour change. Our systematic method for understanding user views enabled us to anticipate and address important barriers to engagement. This methodology may be useful to others developing digital interventions.
AB - This paper illustrates a rigorous approach to developing digital interventions using an evidence-, theory- and person-based approach. Intervention planning included a rapid scoping review that identified cancer survivors’ needs, including barriers and facilitators to intervention success. Review evidence (N = 49 papers) informed the intervention’s Guiding Principles, theory-based behavioural analysis and logic model. The intervention was optimised based on feedback on a prototype intervention through interviews (N = 96) with cancer survivors and focus groups with NHS staff and cancer charity workers (N = 31). Interviews with cancer survivors highlighted barriers to engagement, such as concerns about physical activity worsening fatigue. Focus groups highlighted concerns about support appointment length and how to support distressed participants. Feedback informed intervention modifications, to maximise acceptability, feasibility and likelihood of behaviour change. Our systematic method for understanding user views enabled us to anticipate and address important barriers to engagement. This methodology may be useful to others developing digital interventions.
UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/f57449e0-c600-3e1b-a550-a184af455780/
U2 - 10.1038/s41746-019-0163-4
DO - 10.1038/s41746-019-0163-4
M3 - Article
SN - 2398-6352
VL - 2
JO - npj Digital Medicine
JF - npj Digital Medicine
IS - 1
M1 - 85
ER -