Process for Rapid Co-development of a Decision Aid Prototype for Population-wide Cancer Screening

Odilon Quentin Assan, Claude Bernard Uwizeye, Hervé Tchala Vignon Zomahoun, Oscar Nduwimana, Wilhelm Dubuisson, Guillaume Sillon, Danielle Bergeron, Stéphane Groulx, Wilber Deck, Anik Giguère and France Légaré
Additional contact information
Odilon Quentin Assan: Unité de soutien SSA Québec, Quebec, Canada
Claude Bernard Uwizeye: Unité de soutien SSA Québec, Quebec, Canada
Hervé Tchala Vignon Zomahoun: Institut national d’excellence en santé et en services sociaux, Quebec, Canada
Oscar Nduwimana: Unité de soutien SSA Québec, Quebec, Canada
Wilhelm Dubuisson: Ministère de la Santé et de Services sociaux du Québec, Quebec, Canada
Guillaume Sillon: Ministère de la Santé et de Services sociaux du Québec, Quebec, Canada
Danielle Bergeron: Ministère de la Santé et de Services sociaux du Québec, Quebec, Canada
Stéphane Groulx: Ministère de la Santé et de Services sociaux du Québec, Quebec, Canada
Wilber Deck: Centre intégré de santé et de services sociaux de la Gaspésie, Quebec, Canada
Anik Giguère: VITAM – Centre de recherche en santé durable, Quebec, Canada
France Légaré: Unité de soutien SSA Québec, Quebec, Canada

Medical Decision Making, 2025, vol. 45, issue 7, 775-793

Abstract: Decision aids (DA) are more likely to be adopted if co-developed with stakeholders and culturally adapted. Using the DEVELOPTOOLS Reporting Checklist, we describe a process for rapid co-development of a culturally adapted DA prototype for population-wide cancer-screening programs. Our systematic, collaborative, and iterative methodology had 7 phases: 1) set up the process by adopting best governance practices (e.g., identify and engage stakeholders, adapt our collaborative DA design process, validate development process), with governance comprising 20 individuals from a wide range of sectors including at least 2 citizens; 2) identify and analyze existing DAs relevant to the cancerscreening of interest by conducting a systematic review; 3) share results with stakeholders and make recommendations; 4) formulate Quebec-specific DA content and consult stakeholders including users by conducting e-Delphi surveys; 5) co-design a prototype with stakeholders, including users, following international DA standards; 6) translate the DA using translation–back translation approaches and deploy; and 7) knowledge mobilization (KMb) using end-of-grant and integrated KMb activities. Using the User-Centred Design 11-Item Measure (UCD-11), our proposed process scored 10 of 11 on the UCD-11. Overall, we expect this new co-developed process to ensure that good-quality, user-centered, and culturally adapted DAs for cancer screening are produced within reasonable timeframes. We also expect it to foster the adoption of the DAs. Highlights We report on a 7-step process for collaborating with various stakeholders to create a culturally adapted decision aid (DA) prototype for deciding about cancer screening in Quebec, Canada. The process includes: ○ Making sure the DA prototype design includes users and other interested parties and reflects their needs, perceptions, values, and preferences. ○ Finding and analyzing existing DAs on cancer screening to decide what ours should include ○ Respecting international standards and criteria for DA design ○ Repeated rounds of expert consensus about the exact content, with revisions between each round This method could help the rapid creation of DAs shaped by users’ interests and will ultimately encourage shared decision making.

Keywords: decision aid; rapid; culturally adapted; co-development; process; Quebec; shared decision making (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X251346894 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:medema:v:45:y:2025:i:7:p:775-793

DOI: 10.1177/0272989X251346894

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Medical Decision Making
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().