Vignette Evaluation of Aspirin for Lynch Syndrome

A 2³ factorial trial design was used, with participants randomised evenly across the eight conditions (that is, minimisation) by the survey platform Qualtrics. All vignettes described a hypothetical scenario where a clinical geneticist recommends that the GP prescribes aspirin to a patient with LS (Supplementary Information S1). Three factors were manipulated to form the eight conditions (Box 1). These factors were selected and designed using the authors’ interview data with UK healthcare providers and people with LS (preregistered: https://osf.io/3efg7), the Theoretical Domains Framework,^{10 (link)} existing evidence,^{5 (link)}^,⁷^,^{11 (link)} and expert opinion from healthcare professionals and a patient representative. The three factors were:

NICE guidance (NG151) recommending aspirin for people with LS⁴ (versus no information);

results from the CAPP2 trial investigating the effectiveness of aspirin for people with LS^{3 (link)} (versus no information); and

information comparing the risks and benefits of aspirin⁸ (versus no information).

Participant blinding was not possible, but participants were only informed about the three factors across the vignettes after survey completion.

Free full text: Click here

Lloyd K.E., Hall L.H., Ziegler L., Foy R., Borthwick G.M., MacKenzie M., Taylor D.G, & Smith S.G. (2023). GPs’ willingness to prescribe aspirin for cancer preventive therapy in Lynch syndrome: a factorial randomised trial investigating factors influencing decisions. The British Journal of General Practice, 73(729), e302-e309.

Publication 2023

Aspirin Healthcare professionals Patient Patient representative

Corresponding Organization :

Other organizations : University of Leeds, Clinical Research Institute, University of Newcastle Australia, Newcastle University, The Patients Association, University College Lillebaelt

Top 5 similar protocols

Variable analysis

independent variables

NICE guidance (NG151) recommending aspirin for people with LS (versus no information)
Results from the CAPP2 trial investigating the effectiveness of aspirin for people with LS (versus no information)
Information comparing the risks and benefits of aspirin (versus no information)

dependent variables

Not explicitly mentioned

control variables

Not explicitly mentioned

controls

None specified
None specified

Annotations

Based on most similar protocols

Etiam vel ipsum. Morbi facilisis vestibulum nisl. Praesent cursus laoreet felis. Integer adipiscing pretium orci. Nulla facilisi. Quisque posuere bibendum purus. Nulla quam mauris, cursus eget, convallis ac, molestie non, enim. Aliquam congue. Quisque sagittis nonummy sapien. Proin molestie sem vitae urna. Maecenas lorem.

As authors may omit details in methods from publication, our AI will look for missing critical information across the 5 most similar protocols.

About PubCompare

Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.

We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.

However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.

Ready to get started?

Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!