Table 3.
iPrevent acceptability among clinicians and patients.
| Acceptability assessment | Clinician, n (%) | Patient, n (%) | |
| The amount of information provided isa,b | |||
|
|
Too much | 0 (0) | 1 (3) |
|
|
A little too much | 2 (11) | 3 (8) |
|
|
About right | 17 (89) | 33 (89) |
| The length of the tool isa,b | |||
|
|
Much too long | 4 (21) | 0 (0) |
|
|
A little too long | 6 (32) | 10 (27) |
|
|
About right | 9 (47) | 27 (73) |
| Clarity of informationa,b | |||
|
|
Very clear | 8 (42) | 7 (19) |
|
|
Mostly clear | 5 (26) | 16 (43) |
|
|
About right | 5 (26) | 13 (35) |
|
|
Not clear | 1 (5) | 1 (3) |
| Regarding cancer prevention, how balanced did the information seemb,c | |||
|
|
Biased toward prevention | 3 (17) | 9 (24) |
|
|
Completely balanced | 14 (78) | 26 (70) |
|
|
Biased against prevention | 1 (6) | 2 (5) |
| Any of the information new to youa,b | |||
|
|
All | 0 (0) | 1 (3) |
|
|
Most | 0 (0) | 11 (30) |
|
|
Some | 12 (63) | 22 (59) |
|
|
None | 7 (37) | 3 (8) |
| How helpful with regard to making a decision about BC risk managementa,b | |||
|
|
Very helpful | 9 (47) | 19 (51) |
|
|
Somewhat helpful | 7 (37) | 13 (35) |
|
|
A little helpful | 3 (16) | 5 (14) |
| Recommend this tool to othersa,b | |||
|
|
Definitely | 12 (63) | 18 (49) |
|
|
Probably | 6 (32) | 18 (49) |
|
|
Probably not | 1 (5) | 1 (3) |
| How simple to navigate through the toola,b | |||
|
|
Very easy | 7 (37) | 21 (57) |
|
|
Somewhat easy | 11 (58) | 15 (41) |
|
|
Not easy | 1 (5) | 1 (3) |
| Easy to reada,b | |||
|
|
Very easy | 8 (42) | 22 (59) |
|
|
Somewhat easy | 11 (58) | 15 (41) |
an=19 clinicians because of missing data for 1 clinician.
bn=37 patients because of missing data for 6 patients.
cn=18 clinicians because of missing data for 2 clinicians.