Optimizing risk‐reducing surgery and aspirin decision aids for Lynch syndrome carriers using the person‐based approach: A think‐aloud interview study

Lynch syndrome "carriers" carry a germline pathogenic variant conferring gene-, sex-, and organ-specific increased cancer risks. They are presented with difficult, interrelated choices over their lifetime. This study was part of a larger project to codesign a health intervention, Lynch Choices™ https://canchoose.org.uk to provide an information hub and decision support for carriers, their family members, and clinicians. This study aimed to answer the research question: What content, framing, and design elements of a decision aid for genetic cancer risk management are important to Lynch syndrome carriers? Adult carriers were invited to a think-aloud interview to hear their thoughts about a prototype version of Lynch Choices™ containing values-clarification exercises. The first half of interviews focused on the gynecological risk-reducing surgery and the second half on the aspirin decision aid. Twenty carriers (eight men) were interviewed, half of whom had a personal history of cancer. Iterative refinement of Lynch Choices™ content and design was completed between interviews using a transparent table of changes from the person-based approach. Following the interviews, reflexive thematic analysis was applied to the entire qualitative dataset. Three themes were constructed to guide further optimization and make recommendations for improved cancer risk communication in clinical practice. The three themes were: (1) Interpreting gene-specific cancer risks and "What does it mean to me?"; (2) Words matter: Careful phrasing is important to feel understood; (3) Decision aids: They can help but might trigger emotions. Think-aloud interviews provided in-depth insight into the psychosocial context of carriers. This informed optimization of the decision aid to support engagement and promote shared decision making with healthcare professionals. The learning from this study had broader implications beyond decision aid development, to understanding preferences, needs, and experiences regarding genetic cancer risk communication and decision support.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Genetic Counseling
Published
2025-08-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/jgc4.70089
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Genetic factors in colorectal cancer
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
5.89

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Optimizing risk‐reducing surgery and aspirin decision aids for Lynch syndrome carriers using the person‐based approach: A think‐aloud interview study

Elizabeth Bancroft, Emma J. Crosbie, Mev Dominguez–Valentin, Helen Hanson et al.
4 citations
Journal of Genetic Counseling
Genetic factors in colorectal cancer
5.89
article

Optimizing risk‐reducing surgery and aspirin decision aids for Lynch syndrome carriers using the person‐based approach: A think‐aloud interview study

Elizabeth Bancroft, Emma J. Crosbie, Mev Dominguez–Valentin, Helen Hanson, Mary Jane Esplen, John Burn, Neil Ryan, Lesley Turner, Katherine Morton, Kelly Kohut, Katie M.G. Snape, Pål Møller, Rebecca H. Foster, Karen Hurley
article en
4 citations

Abstract

Lynch syndrome "carriers" carry a germline pathogenic variant conferring gene-, sex-, and organ-specific increased cancer risks. They are presented with difficult, interrelated choices over their lifetime. This study was part of a larger project to codesign a health intervention, Lynch Choices™ https://canchoose.org.uk to provide an information hub and decision support for carriers, their family members, and clinicians. This study aimed to answer the research question: What content, framing, and design elements of a decision aid for genetic cancer risk management are important to Lynch syndrome carriers? Adult carriers were invited to a think-aloud interview to hear their thoughts about a prototype version of Lynch Choices™ containing values-clarification exercises. The first half of interviews focused on the gynecological risk-reducing surgery and the second half on the aspirin decision aid. Twenty carriers (eight men) were interviewed, half of whom had a personal history of cancer. Iterative refinement of Lynch Choices™ content and design was completed between interviews using a transparent table of changes from the person-based approach. Following the interviews, reflexive thematic analysis was applied to the entire qualitative dataset. Three themes were constructed to guide further optimization and make recommendations for improved cancer risk communication in clinical practice. The three themes were: (1) Interpreting gene-specific cancer risks and "What does it mean to me?"; (2) Words matter: Careful phrasing is important to feel understood; (3) Decision aids: They can help but might trigger emotions. Think-aloud interviews provided in-depth insight into the psychosocial context of carriers. This informed optimization of the decision aid to support engagement and promote shared decision making with healthcare professionals. The learning from this study had broader implications beyond decision aid development, to understanding preferences, needs, and experiences regarding genetic cancer risk communication and decision support.

Journal of Genetic CounselingVol. 34(4)
Oslo University Hospital (NO), Cleveland Clinic (US), Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust (GB), Institute of Cancer Research (GB), Tampere University of Applied Sciences (FI), University of Toronto (CA), University of Exeter (GB), St George’s University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (GB), Edinburgh Royal Infirmary (GB), St Mary's Hospital (GB), MRC Centre for Regenerative Medicine (GB), MRC Centre for Reproductive Health (GB), Tampere University Hospital (FI), Tampere University (FI), The Patients Association (GB), University of Southampton (GB), Newcastle University (GB), University of Edinburgh (GB)
Cancer Research UK, National Institute for Health and Care Research, University of Southampton, Manchester Biomedical Research Centre
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Genetic factors in colorectal cancer
5.89
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.