Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Optimizing Rural People’s Access to Relevant Cancer Education and Support Using Peer-Led YouTube Films

  • Published:
Journal of Cancer Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Rural cancer patients have inferior cancer outcomes and unique unmet information needs. This paper explores the value of rural people affected by cancer delivering cancer-related education and support to their peers via 3–5 min online YouTube films. In part 1, 14 rural Australians affected by cancer (10 survivors, 4 carers), 50% (7/14) female, 55–79 years, "storytellers", were purposively invited to be filmed sharing their cancer-related experience and advice for others facing similar challenges. They then reflected on their storytelling experience during semi-structured interviews with an independent researcher. In part 2, 11 rural South Australians affected by cancer (8 survivors, 3 carers), 82% (9/11) female, 32–75 years, "viewers", who had watched at least three of the videos, were interviewed. When data saturation was reached, thematic analysis was employed. Storytellers were found to be highly satisfied with the film-making process and product. They valued rapport building prior to filming and the opportunity to help others. They also found storytelling cathartic and the films useful in communicating their cancer experience to family and friends. Rural viewers appreciated the honesty, authenticity, relatability and believability of the storytellers, the practical advice on rural-specific psychosocial issues, acknowledgment of the impact of isolation and the opportunity to understand others’ cancer experiences. The film’s short duration and professional film-making added appeal. Inclusion of younger storytellers and methods of delivery other than YouTube were suggested. This study highlights the value of this approach for storytellers and viewers. It may be particularly beneficial for isolated rural cancer survivors who feel that their unique challenges are not adequately addressed by mainstream cancer education resources However, further quantitative research to test acceptability and impact in representative rural samples is required.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

We have control of all primary data and agree to allow the journal to review our data if required.

References

  1. Condon JR, Zhang X, Baade P, Griffiths K, Cunningham J, Roder DM, Coory M, Jelfs PL, Threlfall T (2014) Cancer survival for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians: a national study of survival rates and excess mortality. Popul Health Metrics 12(1):1. https://doi.org/10.1186/1478-7954-12-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Jong KE, Smith DP, Yu XQ, O'Connell DL, Goldstein D, Armstrong BK (2004) Remoteness of residence and survival from cancer in New South Wales. Med J Aust 180(12):618–622

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Yu XQ, Luo Q, Kahn C, O'Connell DL, Houssami N (2015) Temporal trends show improved breast cancer survival in Australia but widening urban–rural differences. Breast 24(4):524–527

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (2010) Cancer in Australia 2010: an overview. Canberra

  5. Carriere R, Adam R, Fielding S, Barlas R, Ong Y, Murchie P (2018) Rural dwellers are less likely to survive cancer–an international review and meta-analysis. Health & Place 53:219–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Blake KD, Moss JL, Gaysynsky A, Srinivasan S, Croyle RT (2017) Making the case for investment in rural cancer control: an analysis of rural cancer incidence, mortality, and funding trends. Cancer Epidemiol Prev Biomarkers 26(7):992–997

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bydder SA, Spry NA (2011) Distance to the closest radiotherapy facility and survival after a diagnosis of rectal cancer in Queensland. Med J Aust 195(11–12):661–662

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Craft PS, Buckingham JM, Dahlstrom JE, Beckmann KR, Zhang Y, Stuart-Harris R, Jacob G, Roder D, Tait N (2010) Variation in the management of early breast cancer in rural and metropolitan centres: implications for the organisation of rural cancer services. Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) 19(5):396–401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Gunn KM, Berry NM, Meng X, Wilson CJ, Dollman J, Woodman RJ, Clark RA, Koczwara B (2020) Differences in the health, mental health and health-promoting behaviours of rural versus urban cancer survivors in Australia. Support Care Cancer 28(2):633–643. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-019-04822-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Butow PN, Phillips F, Schweder J, White K, Underhill C, Goldstein D, on behalf of the Clinical Oncological Society of A (2012) Psychosocial well-being and supportive care needs of cancer patients living in urban and rural/regional areas: a systematic review. Support Care Cancer 20(1):1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-011-1270-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Gunn K, Turbull D, McWha L, Davies M, Olver I (2013) Psychosocial service use: a qualitative exploration from the perspective of rural Australian cancer patients. Support Care Cancer 21(9):2547–2555

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Greenhalgh T (1999) Narrative based medicine in an evidence based world. BMJ 318(7179):323–325. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.318.7179.323

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Wilcock PM, Stewart Brown GC, Bateson J, Carver J, Machin S (2003) Using patient stories to inspire quality improvement within the NHS Modernization Agency collaborative programmes. J Clin Nurs 12(3):422–430. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2702.2003.00780.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lal S, Donnelly C, Shin J (2015) Digital storytelling: an innovative tool for practice, education, and research. Occup Ther Health Care 29(1):54–62. https://doi.org/10.3109/07380577.2014.958888

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. D’Cruz K, Douglas J, Serry T (2019) Narrative storytelling as both an advocacy tool and a therapeutic process: perspectives of adult storytellers with acquired brain injury. Neuropsychol Rehabil:1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/09602011.2019.1586733

  16. Sumner T, Hardy P (2018) ‘The stories are all one’: care, compassion and transformation. In: Hardy P, Sumner T (eds) Cultivating compassion: how digital storytelling is transforming healthcare. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 345–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64146-1_23

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Laing C, Moules N, Sinclair SP, Estefan A (2019) Digital storytelling as a psychosocial tool for adult cancer survivors. Oncol Nurs Forum 46(2):147–154. https://doi.org/10.1188/19.ONF.147-154

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Laing C, Moules N, Estefan A, Lang M (2017) Stories that heal: understanding the effects of creating digital stories with pediatric and adolescent/young adult oncology patients. J Pediatr Oncol Nurs 34(4):272–282. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043454216688639

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Hirschey R, Bryant AL, Walker JS, Nolan TS (2020) Systematic review of video education in underrepresented minority cancer survivors. Cancer Nurs 43(4):259–268. https://doi.org/10.1097/ncc.0000000000000829

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Laing C, Moules N, Estefan A, Lang M (2017) “Stories take your role away from you”: understanding the impact on health care professionals of viewing digital stories of pediatric and adolescent/young adult oncology patients. J Pediatr Oncol Nurs 34(4):261–271. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043454217697023

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Santin O, McShane T, Hudson P, Prue G (2019) Using a six-step co-design model to develop and test a peer-led web-based resource (PLWR) to support informal carers of cancer patients. Psycho-oncology 28(3):518–524. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.4969

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Fennell KM, Turnbull DA, Bidargaddi N, McWha JL, Davies M, Olver I (2017) The consumer-driven development and acceptability testing of a website designed to connect rural cancer patients and their families, carers and health professionals with appropriate information and psychosocial support. Eur J Cancer Care 26(5). https://doi.org/10.1111/ecc.12533

  23. Australian Bureau of Statistics (2018) Household use of information technology, Australia, 2016–17. https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/8146.0. Accessed 13 May 2020

  24. Rogers-Clark C (2012) Living with breast cancer: the influence of rurality on women’s suffering and resilience. A postmodern feminist inquiry. Aust J Adv Nurs 20(2):34

    Google Scholar 

  25. Fennell KM, Hull M, Jones M, Dollman J (2018) A comparison of barriers to accessing services for mental and physical health conditions in a sample of rural Australian adults. Rural Remote Health 18(1):4155

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Ajzen I (1991) The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 50(2):179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Bandura A (1999) Social cognitive theory: an agentic perspective. Asian J Soc Psychol 2(1):21–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-839X.00024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Prochaska JO, Velicer WF (1997) The transtheoretical model of health behavior change. Am J Health Promot 12(1):38–48. https://doi.org/10.4278/0890-1171-12.1.38

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Accessibility Remoteness Index of Australia (ARIA) Remoteness Area (RA). (2011) The Department of Health. https://www1.health.gov.au/internet/publications/publishing.nsf/Content/ARIA-Review-Report-2011~ARIA-Review-Report-2011-2~ARIA-Review-Report-2011-2-2-3. Accessed 5 Dec 2019

  30. Braun V, Clarke V (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol 3(2):77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Petersen S, Bull C, Propst O, Dettinger S, Detwiler L (2005) Narrative therapy to prevent illness-related stress disorder. J Couns Dev 83(1):41–47. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6678.2005.tb00578.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Bellizzi KM, Smith A, Schmidt S, Keegan TH, Zebrack B, Lynch CF, Deapen D, Shnorhavorian M, Tompkins BJ, Simon M (2012) Positive and negative psychosocial impact of being diagnosed with cancer as an adolescent or young adult. Cancer 118(20):5155–5162. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.27512

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Warner EL, Kent EE, Trevino KM, Parsons HM, Zebrack BJ, Kirchhoff AC (2016) Social well-being among adolescents and young adults with cancer: a systematic review. Cancer 122(7):1029–1037. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.29866

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Freeman B, Potente S, Rock V, McIver J (2015) Social media campaigns that make a difference: what can public health learn from the corporate sector and other social change marketers? Public Health Res Pract 25(2):e2521517. https://doi.org/10.17061/phrp2521517

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Horrell LN, Lazard AJ, Bhowmick A, Hayes S, Mees S, Valle CG (2019) Attracting users to online health communities: analysis of LungCancer.net’s Facebook advertisement campaign data. J Med Internet Res 21(11):e14421. https://doi.org/10.2196/14421

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Petty RE, Cacioppo JT (1986) The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In: Berkowitz L (ed) Advances in experimental social psychology, vol 19. Academic Press, pp 123–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60214-2

  37. Cugelman B, Thelwall M, Dawes P (2009) The dimensions of web site credibility and their relation to active trust and behavioural impact. Commun Assoc Inf Syst 24(1):455–472. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.02426

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This project could not have been completed without the honesty and generosity of the storytellers. We would also like to acknowledge Chris Hygonnet (Cancer Council SA) and Hugh Fenton (Enlightening Films).

Funding

This project was funded by the auDA Foundation, the University of South Australia and Cancer Council SA.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cancer Research Institute, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia

    Kate M. Gunn & Xiomara Skrabal Ross

  2. Department of Rural Health, Allied Health and Human Performance, University of South Australia, North Terrace, South Australia, Adelaide, Australia

    Kate M. Gunn

  3. School of Psychology, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia

    Ian Olver

Authors
  1. Kate M. Gunn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Xiomara Skrabal Ross
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ian Olver
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Kate M. Gunn and Ian Olver designed the study and obtained funding. Kate M. Gunn led the filming and editing process and managed the project. Data collection and analysis was led by Xiomara Skrabal Ross. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Kate M. Gunn and extensive edits and contributions were made by Xiomara Skrabal Ross, particularly to the results and discussion. All authors revised the manuscript critically for important intellectual content, approved the version to be published, and agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work, including ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kate M. Gunn.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethics Approval

This study was approved by the University of South Australia Human Research Ethics Committee ID: 0000036384. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Consent to Participate

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Consent for Publication

Study participants provided consent for the publication of de-identified information gained during the study.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 2 Interview topic guide
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gunn, K.M., Ross, X.S. & Olver, I. Optimizing Rural People’s Access to Relevant Cancer Education and Support Using Peer-Led YouTube Films. J Canc Educ 37, 973–982 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-020-01908-w

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-020-01908-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation