Randi M Williams

Dr. Randi M Williams

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

19Years (2008-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
24 February 2022 in Cancer
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
RWRandi M Williams
Randi M Williams
Tengfei LiTengfei Li
Tengfei Li
GLGeorge Luta
George Luta
MWMin Qi Wang
Min Qi Wang
LALucile Adams-Campbell
Lucile Adams-Campbell
KTKathryn L. Taylor
Kathryn L. Taylor

29 July 2013 in JAMA Internal Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
KTKathryn L. Taylor
Kathryn L. Taylor
RWRandi M Williams
Randi M Williams
KDKimberly Davis
Kimberly Davis
GLGeorge Luta
George Luta
SPSofiya Penek
Sofiya Penek
EMEdward Miller
Edward Miller
IMPORTANCE The conflicting recommendations for prostate cancer (PCa) screening and the mixed messages communicated to the public about screening effectiveness make it critical to assist men in making informed decisions. OBJECTIVE To assess the effectiveness of 2 decision aids in helping men make informed PCa screening decisions. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A racially diverse group of male outpatients aged 45 to 70 years from 3 sites were interviewed by telephone at baseline, 1 month, and 13 months, from 2007 through 2011. We conducted intention-to-treat univariate analyses and multivariable linear and logistic regression analyses, adjusting for baseline outcome measures. INTERVENTION Random assignment to print-based decision aid (n = 628), web-based interactive decision aid (n = 625), or usual care (UC) (n = 626). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Prostate cancer knowledge, decisional conflict, decisional satisfaction, and whether participants underwent PCa screening. RESULTS Of 4794 eligible men approached, 1893 were randomized. At each follow-up assessment, univariate and multivariable analyses indicated that both decision aids resulted in significantly improved PCa knowledge and reduced decisional conflict compared with UC (all P<.001). At 1 month, the standardized mean difference (Cohen's d) in knowledge for the web group vs UC was 0.74, and in the print group vs UC, 0.73. Decisional conflict was significantly lower for web vs UC (d = 0.33) and print vs UC (d = 0.36). At 13 months, these differences were smaller but remained significant. At 1 month, high satisfaction was reported by significantly more print (60.4%) than web participants (52.2%; P=.009) and significantly more web (P=.001) and print (P=.03) than UC participants (45.5%). At 13 months, differences in the proportion reporting high satisfaction among print (55.7%) compared with UC (49.8%; P=.06) and web participants (50.4%; P=.10) were not significant. Screening rates at 13 months did not differ significantly among groups. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Both decision aids improved participants' informed decision making about PCa screening up to 13 months later but did not affect actual screening rates. Dissemination of these decision aids may be a valuable public health tool.

4 December 2009 in Journal of Religion and Health
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
RWRandi M Williams
Randi M Williams
KGKaren Glanz
Karen Glanz
MKMichelle C. Kegler
Michelle C. Kegler
EDErnest Davis
Ernest Davis

3 March 2010 in BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
CDCaroline S Dorfman
Caroline S Dorfman
RWRandi M Williams
Randi M Williams
EKElisabeth C Kassan
Elisabeth C Kassan
SRSara N Red
Sara N Red
DDDavid L Dawson
David L Dawson
KTKathryn L. Taylor
Kathryn L. Taylor
Background: Whether early detection and treatment of prostate cancer (PCa) will reduce disease-related mortality remains uncertain. As a result, tools are needed to facilitate informed decision making. While there have been several decision aids (DAs) developed and tested, very few have included an exercise to help men clarify their values and preferences about PCa screening. Further, only one DA has utilized an interactive web-based format, which allows for an expansion and customization of the material. We describe the development of two DAs, a booklet and an interactive website, each with a values clarification component and designed for use in diverse settings. Methods: We conducted two feasibility studies to assess men's (45-70 years) Internet access and their willingness to use a web- vs. a print-based tool. The booklet was adapted from two previous versions evaluated in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the website was created to closely match the content of the revised booklet. Usability testing was conducted to obtain feedback regarding draft versions of the materials. The tools were also reviewed by a plain language expert and the interdisciplinary research team. Feedback on the content and presentation led to iterative modifications of the tools. Results: The feasibility studies confirmed that the Internet was a viable medium, as the majority of men used a computer, had access to the Internet, and Internet use increased over time. Feedback from the usability testing on the length, presentation, and content of the materials was incorporated into the final versions of the booklet and website. Both the feasibility studies and the usability testing highlighted the need to address men's informed decision making regarding screening. Conclusions: Informed decision making for PCa screening is crucial at present and may be important for some time, particularly if a definitive recommendation either for or against screening does not emerge from ongoing prostate cancer screening trials. We have detailed our efforts at developing print- and web-based DAs to assist men in determining how to best meet their PCa screening preferences. Following completion of our ongoing RCT designed to test these materials, our goal will be to develop a dissemination project for the more effective tool. Trial Registration: NCT00623090

1 June 2013 in Patient Education and Counseling
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
RWRandi M Williams
Randi M Williams
KDKimberly M. Davis
Kimberly M. Davis
GLGeorge Luta
George Luta
SESara N. Edmond
Sara N. Edmond
CDCaroline S. Dorfman
Caroline S. Dorfman
KTKathryn L. Taylor
Kathryn L. Taylor

18 January 2008 in Psycho-Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
RWRandi M Williams
Randi M Williams
NZNicole L. Zincke
Nicole L. Zincke
RTRalph O. Turner
Ralph O. Turner
JDJackson L. Davis
Jackson L. Davis
KDKimberly M. Davis
Kimberly M. Davis
KTKathryn L. Taylor
Kathryn L. Taylor