Application of a concise video to improve patient understanding of tumor genomic testing in community and academic practice settings
11 affiliations
- 1Division of Medical Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America
- 2Department of Biomedical Informatics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America
- 3Division of Human Genetics, Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America
- 4Department of Cancer Biology and Genetics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America
- 5Division of Clinical Cancer Genomics, Department of Medical Oncology and Therapeutics Research, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, California, United States of America
- 6Division of Health Services Management and Policy, College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America
- 7Bon Secours-Mercy Health Lima, Lima, Ohio, United States of America
- 8Bon Secours-Mercy Health St. Elizabeth, Youngstown, Ohio, United States of America
- 9School of Communication, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America
- 10Bon Secours Cancer Institute at St. Francis, Richmond, Virginia, United States of America
- 11Pelotonia Institute for Immuno-Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America
Abstract
Purpose: Tumor genomic testing (TGT) is standard-of-care for most patients with advanced/metastatic cancer. Despite established guidelines, patient education prior to TGT is frequently omitted. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact and durability of a concise 3–4 minute video for patient education prior to TGT in community versus academic sites and across cancer types. Patients and Methods: Patients undergoing standard-of-care TGT were enrolled at a tertiary academic institution in three cohorts: Cohort 1-breast cancer; Cohort 2-lung cancer; Cohort 3-other cancers. Cohort 4 consisted of patients with any cancer type similarly undergoing SOC TGT at one of three community cancer centers. Participants completed survey measures prior to video viewing (T1), immediately post-viewing (T2), and after return of TGT results (T3). Outcome measures included: 1) 10-question objective genomic knowledge/understanding (GKU); 2) 10-question video message-specific knowledge (VMSK); 3) 11-question Trust in Physician/Provider (TIPP); 4) perceptions regarding TGT. Results: A total of 203 participants completed all survey timepoints. Higher baseline GKU and VMSK scores were significantly associated with higher income and greater years of education. For the primary objective, there was a significant and sustained improvement in VMSK from T1:T2:T3 (Poverall p < 0.0001), with no significant change in GKU (p = 0.41) or TIPP (p = 0.73). This trend was consistent within each cohort (all p ≤ 0.0001). Results for four VMSK questions significantly improved, including impact on treatment decisions, incidental germline findings, and insurance coverage of testing. Conclusions: A concise, 3–4 minute, broadly applicable educational video administered prior to TGT significantly and sustainably improved video message-specific knowledge in diverse cancer types and in academic and community settings. This resource is publicly available at http://www.tumor-testing.com, with a goal to efficiently educate and empower patients regarding TGT while addressing guidelines within the flow of clinical practice. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05215769
Related
- A Procedural Faculty Development Course for Emergency Physicians Practicing in Community and Academic Settings.
- A Systematic Review of Spaced Repetition, Retrieval Practice, and Academic Performance in Undergraduate Medical Students
- Interpersonal Trauma, Marginalization, and Low-Resource Settings: Understanding Sexual and Gender Minority People’s Help-Seeking and Service Utilization Experiences
- Adherence rate and predictors of clear aligner wear in Canadian university and private practice settings: a survey development protocol
- Understanding parental trauma in caring for children with down syndrome within LSEN school settings.
BibTeX
@article{veney2026application,
title = {{Application of a concise video to improve patient understanding of tumor genomic testing in community and academic practice settings}},
author = {Deloris J. Veney and Lai Wei and Jaden Miller and Amanda E. Toland and Carolyn J. Presley and Heather Hampel and Tasleem J. Padamsee and Michael J. Bishop and James J. Kim and Shelly R. Hovick and William J. Irvin and Leigha Senter and Daniel G. Stover},
journal = {PLOS One},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.1371/journal.pone.0360611},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0360611},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Application of a concise video to improve patient understanding of tumor genomic testing in community and academic practice settings
AU - Deloris J. Veney
AU - Lai Wei
AU - Jaden Miller
AU - Amanda E. Toland
AU - Carolyn J. Presley
AU - Heather Hampel
AU - Tasleem J. Padamsee
AU - Michael J. Bishop
AU - James J. Kim
AU - Shelly R. Hovick
AU - William J. Irvin
AU - Leigha Senter
AU - Daniel G. Stover
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/13
JO - PLOS One
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0360611
UR - https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0360611
AB - Purpose: Tumor genomic testing (TGT) is standard-of-care for most patients with advanced/metastatic cancer. Despite established guidelines, patient education prior to TGT is frequently omitted. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact and durability of a concise 3–4 minute video for patient education prior to TGT in community versus academic sites and across cancer types. Patients and Methods: Patients undergoing standard-of-care TGT were enrolled at a tertiary academic institution in three cohorts: Cohort 1-breast cancer; Cohort 2-lung cancer; Cohort 3-other cancers. Cohort 4 consisted of patients with any cancer type similarly undergoing SOC TGT at one of three community cancer centers. Participants completed survey measures prior to video viewing (T1), immediately post-viewing (T2), and after return of TGT results (T3). Outcome measures included: 1) 10-question objective genomic knowledge/understanding (GKU); 2) 10-question video message-specific knowledge (VMSK); 3) 11-question Trust in Physician/Provider (TIPP); 4) perceptions regarding TGT. Results: A total of 203 participants completed all survey timepoints. Higher baseline GKU and VMSK scores were significantly associated with higher income and greater years of education. For the primary objective, there was a significant and sustained improvement in VMSK from T1:T2:T3 (Poverall p < 0.0001), with no significant change in GKU (p = 0.41) or TIPP (p = 0.73). This trend was consistent within each cohort (all p ≤ 0.0001). Results for four VMSK questions significantly improved, including impact on treatment decisions, incidental germline findings, and insurance coverage of testing. Conclusions: A concise, 3–4 minute, broadly applicable educational video administered prior to TGT significantly and sustainably improved video message-specific knowledge in diverse cancer types and in academic and community settings. This resource is publicly available at http://www.tumor-testing.com, with a goal to efficiently educate and empower patients regarding TGT while addressing guidelines within the flow of clinical practice. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05215769
SN - 1932-6203
ER -