Top of funnel best practices
Helix needed to understand how to optimize positive user perceptions at their earliest touchpoints within their partners' community health programs. They tested and studied users as they went through various steps of the enrollment funnel, some of which varied between different health system partners.
To support important health equity initiatives and create research breakthroughs that benefit diverse participant populations across all communities represented within the Helix Research Network, Helix’s UX study plans were designed to require recruitment of diverse racial and ethnic audiences.
They implemented this requirement to ensure that historically marginalized populations, who are often less likely to enroll in and benefit from genetic screening initiatives, had a significant voice in the design of their products, messaging and the precision healthcare journey they were offering.
Helix’s UX team utilized a mixed-methods approach to gather insights about the preferences and behaviors of potential participants. They used Figma prototypes to test program invitations. They reviewed text, link and button placement, and calls to action on landing pages. They also ran attitudinal surveys which gathered quantitative insights. The variety of insights collected validated prospective participants’ understanding that the program is a research study, they are able to assess potential benefits and risks to joining, and are able to use the information provided to make an informed decision about whether or not to join the program.
Helix took the findings from this project and placed them in best practices materials, which they provided to partner health systems to help guide their top-of-funnel marketing campaigns. The success of this user experience testing program helped Helix’s strategy team plan the next and most important phase: enrollment optimization.
Enrollment optimization
When a participant enrolls into a research study with a health system partner and Helix, they learn about the program (including potential benefits and risks); sign a study informed consent form (a legal document); and provide a DNA sample (which involves traveling to a clinic to have blood drawn or requesting a saliva collection kit sent to your home). For health system partners and Helix, each enrollment adds more critical information to their databases, which support genetic research discoveries. Helix’s enrollment experience needs to help participants make informed decisions about whether or not to enroll in the program.
Helix’s UX team used Figma prototypes to test for qualitative feedback. As with the investigation into their top of funnel best practices, they conducted behavioral click testing and ran attitudinal surveys to gather quantitative data points. The insights were illuminating and they helped to shape important changes to Helix’s enrollment programs.
According to Andrew Schultz, Associate Director, Product Design & UX Research, “We learned it’s critical to highlight the no-cost nature of our DNA screening program at the earliest touchpoints. When users don’t see that this service is free to them, they may assume they will have to pay. If someone is unable to pay or not interested in paying, we will lose their engagement.”
Knowing this new information, Suzanne Millward, Senior UX Researcher, worked with marketing and product teams to highlight the ‘no cost’ aspect of the genetic screening programs. Addressing their financial concerns up front kept users in the funnel longer, and it gave them a chance to learn more about the benefits of signing up.
Helix also learned about ways to discuss the value of privacy in more participant-friendly terms. Per Suzanne, “We conducted a deep dive into the types of privacy information prospective users need in order to make an informed decision about whether to participate in our program. We discovered that information with complex and indirect legal language is not only frustrating for users, but can result in them dropping out of the process at an early stage.”
To address this, the team kept the legal language used in the program’s informed consent document, but re-wrote the language used in the FAQ sections, adopting clear, direct descriptions for users, and text written at a more accessible reading level to support a wider variety of user types.
