Improving Critical Appraisal of Cancer‐Related Health Information: A Pilot Randomised Trial of the Informed Health Choices‐Cancer Programme
Published online on August 01, 2026
Abstract
["Psycho-Oncology, Volume 35, Issue 8, August 2026. ", "\nABSTRACT\n\nBackground\nPeople impacted by cancer may be confronted with conflicting and misleading cancer‐related information that is everywhere in daily life. The Informed Health Choices‐Cancer (IHC‐C) programme was developed to equip participants with the skills and knowledge necessary to think critically and make well‐informed health choices.\n\n\nAims\nTo assess the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary outcomes of the IHC‐C programme.\n\n\nMethods\nWe conducted an online pilot randomised trial to compare the IHC‐C programme with a waitlist control within a prespecified recruitment window. Adults impacted by cancer (current patients, survivors, informal caregivers and loved ones) were recruited and randomised 1:1. The intervention was a 4‐week, nine‐unit online learning programme. Primary outcomes assessed feasibility (recruitment, retention, adherence, technical feasibility, and data‐collection processes) and acceptability (participation rates, participation burden, and overall acceptability). Secondary outcomes included eHealth literacy, critical thinking and decision‐making skills, which were assessed post‐intervention.\n\n\nResults\nForty‐three participants were randomised (22 intervention; 21 waitlist control), achieving 72% of the recruitment target. In the intervention group, 91% accessed the platform and 64% completed all nine units. Outcome assessment completion was 64% (14/22) in the intervention group and 81% (17/21) in the control group. Acceptability was high among intervention completers, as indicated by both quantitative and qualitative measures. eHealth literacy scores were high in both groups, with ceiling effects and no between‐group difference (Hodges‐Lehmann median difference −1.0, 95% CI –5.0 to 1.0). Critical thinking and decision‐making quiz scores were higher in the intervention group in exploratory analyses (median difference: 1.0, 95% CI: 1.0–2.0), although the distributions clustered near the upper range.\n\n\nConclusions\nThe IHC‐C programme was feasible to deliver and acceptable to participants within a defined recruitment period. These findings support progression to a fully powered trial, with refinements to engagement strategies and outcome measurement.\n\n\nTrial registration\nThis trial was registered on ISRCTN registry with ID ISRCTN17391470\n\n"]