Cost-effectiveness of goal-directed and outcome-based financial incentives for weight loss in low-income populations: the FIReWoRk randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The Financial Incentives for Weight Reduction (FIReWoRk) clinical trial showed that financial incentive weight-loss strategies designed using behavioral economics were more effective than provision of weight-management resources only. We now evaluate cost-effectiveness. METHODS: Cost-effectiveness analysis of a multisite randomized trial enrolling 668 participants with obesity living in low-income neighborhoods. Participants were randomized to (1) goal-directed incentives (targeting behavioral goals), (2) outcome-based incentives (targeting weight-loss), and (3) resources only, which were provided to all participants and included a 1-year commercial weight-loss program membership, wearable activity monitor, food journal, and digital scale. We assessed program costs, time costs, quality of life, weight, and incremental cost-effectiveness in dollars-per-kilogram lost. RESULTS: Mean program costs at 12 months, based on weight loss program attendance, physical activity participation, food diary use, self-monitoring of weight, and incentive payments was $1271 in the goal-directed group, $1194 in the outcome-based group, and $834 in the resources-only group (difference, $437 [95% CI, 398 to 462] and $360 [95% CI, 341-363] for goal-directed or outcome-based vs resources-only, respectively; difference, $77 [95% CI, 58-130] for goal-directed vs outcome-based group). Quality of life did not differ significantly between the groups, but weight loss was substantially greater in the incentive groups (difference, 2.34 kg [95% CI, 0.53-4.14] and 1.79 kg [95% CI, -0.14 to 3.72] for goal-directed or outcome-based vs resources only, respectively; difference, 0.54 kg [95% CI, -1.29 to 2.38] for goal-directed vs outcome-based). Cost-effectiveness of incentive strategies based on program costs was $189/kg lost in the goal-directed group (95% CI, $124/kg to $383/kg) and $186/kg lost in the outcome-based group (95% CI, $113/kg to $530/kg). CONCLUSIONS: Goal-directed and outcome-based financial incentives were cost-effective strategies for helping low-income individuals with obesity lose weight. Their incremental cost per kilogram lost were comparable to other weight loss interventions.

Impact of a Patient-Centered Behavioral Economics Intervention on Hypertension Control in a Highly Disadvantaged Population: a Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Uncontrolled hypertension contributes to disparities in cardiovascular outcomes. Patient intervention strategies informed by behavioral economics and social psychology could improve blood pressure (BP) control in disadvantaged minority populations. OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact on BP control of an intervention combining short-term financial incentives with promotion of intrinsic motivation among highly disadvantaged patients. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred seven adults (98% African American or Latino) aged 18 or older with uncontrolled hypertension attending Federally Qualified Health Centers. INTERVENTION: Six-month intervention, combining financial incentives for measuring home BP, recording medication use, BP improvement, and achieving target BP values with counseling linking hypertension control efforts to participants' personal reasons to stay healthy. MAIN MEASURES: Primary outcomes: percentage achieving systolic BP (SBP) < 140 mmHg, percentage achieving diastolic BP (DBP) < 90 mmHg, and changes in SBP and DBP, all after 6 months. Priority secondary outcomes were SBP < 140 mmHg, DBP < 90 mmHg, and BP change at 12 months, 6 months after the intervention ended. KEY RESULTS: After 6 months, rates of achieving target BP values for intervention and control subjects respectively was 57.1% vs. 40.2% for SBP < 140 mmHg (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 2.53 (1.13-5.70)), 79.8% vs 70.1% for DBP < 90 mmHg (AOR 2.50 (0.84-7.44)), and 53.6% vs 40.2% for achieving both targets (AOR 2.04 (0.92-4.52)). However, at 12 months, the groups did not differ significantly in these 3 measures: 39.5% vs 35.0% for SBP (AOR 1.20 (0.51-2.83)), 68.4% vs 75.0% for DBP (AOR 0.70 (0.24-2.09)), and 35.5% vs 33.8% for both (AOR 1.03 (0.44-2.42)). Change in absolute SBP and DBP did not differ significantly between the groups at 6 or 12 months. Exploratory post hoc analysis revealed intervention benefit only occurred among individuals whose providers intensified their regimens, but not among those with intensification but no intervention. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention achieved short-term improvement in SBP control in a highly disadvantaged population. Despite attempts to enhance intrinsic motivation, the effect was not sustained after incentives were withdrawn. Future research should evaluate combined patient/provider strategies to enhance such interventions and sustain their benefit. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01402453; http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01402453.

Are Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Guidelines for Preexposure Prophylaxis Specific Enough? Formulation of a Personalized HIV Risk Score for Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Initiation.

BACKGROUND: Preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has emerged as a human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) prevention tool for populations at highest risk for HIV infection. Current US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines for identifying PrEP candidates may not be specific enough to identify gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM) at the highest risk for HIV infection. We created an HIV risk score for HIV-negative MSM based on Syndemics Theory to develop a more targeted criterion for assessing PrEP candidacy. METHODS: Behavioral risk assessment and HIV testing data were analyzed for HIV-negative MSM attending the Los Angeles LGBT Center between January 2009 and June 2014 (n = 9481). Syndemics Theory informed the selection of variables for a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model. Estimated coefficients were summed to create an HIV risk score, and model fit was compared between our model and CDC guidelines using the Akaike Information Criterion and Bayesian Information Criterion. RESULTS: Approximately 51% of MSM were above a cutpoint that we chose as an illustrative risk score to qualify for PrEP, identifying 75% of all seroconverting MSM. Our model demonstrated a better overall fit when compared with the CDC guidelines (Akaike Information Criterion Difference = 68) in addition to identifying a greater proportion of HIV infections. CONCLUSIONS: Current CDC PrEP guidelines should be expanded to incorporate substance use, partner-level, and other Syndemic variables that have been shown to contribute to HIV acquisition. Deployment of such personalized algorithms may better hone PrEP criteria and allow providers and their patients to make a more informed decision prior to PrEP use.

Assessing Self-Control and Geosocial Networking App Behavior Among an Online Sample of Men Who Have Sex with Men.

Geosocial networking phone applications (GSN apps) used to meet sexual partners have become popular in the men who have sex with men (MSM) communities of the USA since 2009. Previous studies have shown greater incidence of gonorrhea and chlamydia and lower testing frequency for HIV testing among GSN app users when compared to non-users. The present study aims to determine the type, number, and frequency of apps used, as well as the association between dispositional self-control and health-related behaviors. Participants (n = 146) were recruited from Amazon's Mechanical Turk program to respond to a brief GSN app marketing survey. Multivariate regression was used to determine differences in app priorities, length of app use, and number of sexual partners between high self-control and low self-control participants. A majority of the participants reported using Grindr (78 %) followed by Scruff (19 %), Growlr (12 %), and Jack'd (12 %). Most individuals used one app only (58 %), but a significant proportion reported using two apps (28 %) or three or more apps (14 %). Respondents with low self-control were more likely to report a higher number of hours using GSN apps and a higher number of sexual partners, controlling for race/ethnicity, education, employment, and HIV status. Given the popularity of this burgeoning communication medium, these findings have important implications for developing prevention resources for different segments of GSN app users.

Using insights from behavioral economics and social psychology to help patients manage chronic diseases.

Despite a revolution in therapeutics, the ability to control chronic diseases remains elusive. We present here a conceptual model of the potential role of behavioral tools in chronic disease control. Clinicians implicitly accept the assumption that patients will act rationally to maximize their self-interest. However, patients may not always be the rational actors that we imagine. Major behavioral barriers to optimal health behavior include patients' fear of threats to health, unwillingness to think about problems when risks are known or data are ambiguous, the discounting of risks that are far in the future, failure to act due to lack of motivation, insufficient confidence in the ability to overcome a health problem, and inattention due to pressures of everyday life. Financial incentives can stimulate initiation of health-promoting behaviors by reducing or eliminating financial barriers, but may not produce long-term behavior change without additional interventions. Strategies have been developed by behavioral economists and social psychologists to address each of these barriers to better decision-making. These include: labeling positive behaviors in ways consistent with patient life goals and priorities; greater focus on more immediate risks of chronic diseases; intermediate subgoals as steps to a large health goal; and implementation of specific plans as to when, where, and how an action will be taken. Such strategies hold promise for improving health behaviors and disease control, but most have not been studied in medical settings. The effectiveness of these approaches should be evaluated for their potential as tools for the clinician.

Effectiveness of Goal-Directed and Outcome-Based Financial Incentives for Weight Loss in Primary Care Patients With Obesity Living in Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Neighborhoods: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Financial incentives for weight management may increase use of evidence-based strategies while addressing obesity-related economic disparities in low-income populations. Objective: To examine the effects of 2 financial incentive strategies developed using behavioral economic theory when added to provision of weight management resources. Design, Setting, and Participants: Three-group, randomized clinical trial conducted from November 2017 to May 2021 at 3 hospital-based clinics in New York City, New York, and Los Angeles, California. A total of 1280 adults with obesity living in low-income neighborhoods were invited to participate, and 668 were enrolled. Interventions: Participants were randomly assigned to goal-directed incentives, outcome-based incentives, or a resources-only group. The resources-only group participants were given a 1-year commercial weight-loss program membership, self-monitoring tools (digital scale, food journal, and physical activity monitor), health education, and monthly one-on-one check-in visits. The goal-directed group included resources and linked financial incentives to evidence-based weight-loss behaviors. The outcome-based arm included resources and linked financial incentives to percentage of weight loss. Participants in the incentive groups could earn up to $750. Main Outcomes and Measures: Proportion of patients achieving 5% or greater weight loss at 6 months. Results: The mean (SD) age of the 668 participants enrolled was 47.7 (12.4) years; 541 (81.0%) were women, 485 (72.6%) were Hispanic, and 99 (14.8%) were Black. The mean (SD) weight at enrollment was 98.96 (20.54) kg, and the mean body mass index (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) was 37.95 (6.55). At 6 months, the adjusted proportion of patients who lost at least 5% of baseline weight was 22.1% in the resources-only group, 39.0% in the goal-directed group, and 49.1% in the outcome-based incentive group (difference, 10.08 percentage points [95% CI, 1.31-18.85] for outcome based vs goal directed; difference, 27.03 percentage points [95% CI, 18.20-35.86] and 16.95 percentage points [95% CI, 8.18-25.72] for outcome based or goal directed vs resources only, respectively). However, mean percentage of weight loss was similar in the incentive arms. Mean earned incentives was $440.44 in the goal-directed group and $303.56 in the outcome-based group, but incentives did not improve financial well-being. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, outcome-based and goal-directed financial incentives were similarly effective, and both strategies were more effective than providing resources only for clinically significant weight loss in low-income populations with obesity. Future studies should evaluate cost-effectiveness and long-term outcomes. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03157713.

Decisions about overdraft coverage: Disclosure design and personal finances.

Policymakers often require disclosures to help consumers make informed decisions, despite considerable debate over disclosures' effectiveness. Traditional accounts argue that consumers with stable preferences use disclosures to become informed. In contrast, behavioral research suggests that consumers may be inattentive or construct preferences in the moment. We contrast these accounts in the context of overdraft, where consumers can "opt in" to coverage and fees. In Study 1, we use conjoint analysis to assess perceptions of whether consumers in varying circumstances should opt in. Both overdraft program characteristics (including fees) and consumers' personal financial characteristics (e.g., having a financial buffer) matter. In Study 2, we compare three overdraft disclosures, finding variation in the proportion of consumers who make an active choice (15%-65%) and limited effects on comprehension and opt-in rates. In Study 3, we augment overdraft disclosures with text about personal financial characteristics. These disclosures increase active choice without detrimental effects on comprehension. Together, our studies support a constructed preferences account and highlight specific benefits of reminding consumers about the match between financial products and their personal situations. We discuss implications for financial disclosures and overdraft policy. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Protocol for pragmatic randomised trial: integrating electronic health record-based behavioural economic 'nudges' into the electronic health record to reduce preoperative testing for patients undergoing cataract surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Robust randomised trial data have shown that routine preoperative (pre-op) testing for cataract surgery patients is inappropriate. While guidelines have discouraged testing since 2002, cataract pre-op testing rates have remained unchanged since the 1990s. Given the challenges of reducing low-value care despite strong consensus around the evidence, innovative approaches are needed to promote high-value care. This trial evaluates the impact of an interdisciplinary electronic health record (EHR) intervention that is informed by behavioural economic theory. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This pragmatic randomised trial is being conducted at UCLA Health between June 2021 and June 2022 with a 12-month follow-up period. We are randomising all UCLA Health physicians who perform pre-op visits during the study period to one of the three nudge arms or usual care. These three nudge alerts address (1) patient harm, (2) increased out-of-pocket costs for patients and (3) psychological harm to the patients related to pre-op testing. The nudges are triggered when a physician starts to order a pre-op test. We hypothesise that receipt of a nudge will be associated with reduced pre-op testing. The primary outcome will be the change in the percentage of patients undergoing pre-op testing at 12 months. Secondary outcomes will include the percentage of patients undergoing specific categories of pre-op tests (labs, EKGs, chest X-rays (CXRs)), the efficacy of each nudge, same-day surgery cancellations and cost savings. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol was approved by the institutional review board of the University of California, Los Angeles as well as a nominated Data Safety Monitoring Board. If successful, we will have created a tool that can be disseminated rapidly to EHR vendors across the nation to reduce inappropriate testing for the most common low-risk surgical procedures in the country. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04104256.

Application of Behavioral Economics Principles Improves Participation in Mailed Outreach for Colorectal Cancer Screening.

INTRODUCTION: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a major cause of cancer-related morbidity and mortality in the United States. Although various interventions have improved screening rates, they often require abundant resources and can be difficult to implement. Social psychology and behavioral economics principles offer an opportunity for low-cost and easy-to-implement strategies but are less common in clinical settings. METHODS: We randomized 2,000 patients aged 50-75 years eligible for CRC screening to one of the 2 mailed interventions: a previously used text-based letter describing and offering fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) and colonoscopy (usual care arm); or a letter leveraging social psychology and behavioral economics principles (e.g., implied scarcity and choice architecture), minimal text, and multiple images to offer FIT and colonoscopy (intervention arm). We compared total screening uptake, FIT uptake, and colonoscopy uptake at 1-month intervals in each group. RESULTS: There were 1,882 patients included in the final analysis. The mean age was 69.3 years, and baseline characteristics in the 2 groups were similar. Screening completion at 26 weeks was 19.5% in the usual care arm (16.3% FIT vs 3.2% colonoscopy, P < 0.01) and 24.1% in the intervention arm (22.1% FIT vs 2.0% colonoscopy, P < 0.01) (P = 0.02). DISCUSSION: Among primary care patients aged 50-75 years in an academic setting, mailed CRC outreach employing social psychology and behavioral economics principles led to a higher participation in CRC screening than usual care mailed outreach. TRANSLATIONAL IMPACT: Mailed interventions to increase CRC screening should incorporate social psychology and behavioral economics principles to improve participation.

Reducing cardiovascular risk among people living with HIV: Rationale and design of the INcreasing Statin Prescribing in HIV Behavioral Economics REsearch (INSPIRE) randomized controlled trial.

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a major cause of morbidity among people living with HIV (PLWH). Statins can safely and effectively reduce CVD risk in PLWH, but evidence-based statin therapy is under-prescribed in PLWH. Developed using an implementation science framework, INcreasing Statin Prescribing in HIV Behavioral Economics REsearch (INSPIRE) is a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial that addresses organization-, clinician- and patient-level barriers to statin uptake in Los Angeles community health clinics serving racially and ethnically diverse PLWH. After assessing knowledge about statins and barriers to clinician prescribing and patient uptake, we will design, implement and measure the effectiveness of (1) educational interventions targeting leadership, clinicians, and patients, followed by (2) behavioral economics-informed clinician feedback on statin uptake. In addition, we will assess implementation outcomes, including changes in clinician acceptability of statin prescribing for PLWH, clinician acceptability of the education and feedback interventions, and cost of implementation.

Goal-directed versus outcome-based financial incentives for weight loss among low-income patients with obesity: rationale and design of the Financial Incentives foR Weight Reduction (FIReWoRk) randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Obesity is a major public health challenge and exacerbates economic disparities through employment discrimination and increased personal health expenditures. Financial incentives for weight management may intensify individuals' utilisation of evidence-based behavioural strategies while addressing obesity-related economic disparities in low-income populations. Trials have focused on testing incentives contingent on achieving weight loss outcomes. However, based on social cognitive and self-determination theories, providing incentives for achieving intermediate behavioural goals may be more sustainable than incentivising outcomes if they enhance an individual's skills and self-efficacy for maintaining long-term weight loss. The objective of this paper is to describe the rationale and design of the Financial Incentives foR Weight Reduction study, a randomised controlled trial to test the comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of two financial incentive strategies for weight loss (goal directed vs outcome based) among low-income adults with obesity, as well as compared with the provision of health behaviour change resources alone. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We are recruiting 795 adults, aged 18-70 years with a body mass index ≥30 kg/m2, from three primary care clinics serving residents of socioeconomically disadvantaged neighbourhoods in New York City and Los Angeles. All participants receive a 1-year commercial weight loss programme membership, self-monitoring tools (bathroom scale, food journal and Fitbit Alta HR), health education and monthly check-in visits. In addition to these resources, those in the two intervention groups can earn up to $750 over 6 months for: (1) participating in an intensive weight management programme, self-monitoring weight and diet and meeting physical activity guidelines (goal-directed arm); or (2) a ≥1.5% to ≥5% reduction in baseline weight (outcome-based arm). To maximise incentive efficacy, we incorporate concepts from behavioural economics, including immediacy of payments and framing feedback to elicit regret aversion. We will use generalised mixed effect models for repeated measures to examine intervention effects on weight at 6, 9 and 12 months. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Human research protection committees at New York University School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) David Geffen School of Medicine and Olive-View-UCLA Medical Center granted ethics approval. We will disseminate the results of this research via peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and meetings with stakeholders. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03157713.

Using aesthetics and self-affirmation to encourage openness to risky (and safe) choices.

Research has shown self-affirmation to be a powerful tool for increasing openness to arguments. However, prior examinations of its effects involved manipulations with limited applicability outside the laboratory. Building on recent work suggesting that choice of highly aesthetic products can be a form of affirmation, we proposed and tested whether merely affiliating people with high aesthetics can affirm their sense of self and thus encourage openness to arguments advocating selection of one option over another. In 3 experiments we examined this effect in financial and consumer decisions in which choices varied in their inherent risk. Across the experiments, after affiliating people with high (vs. low) aesthetics, they were more likely to select the advocated option--whether that option was the riskier or less risky option. This occurred using actual annual reports and a sample of experienced investors (Experiment 1), when the aesthetic affiliation and the choice tasks were in entirely unrelated areas (Experiment 2) and was driven by greater openness to arguments (Experiment 3). Together these studies offer a self-affirmation manipulation that is relevant and easily used by practitioners in a variety of fields. They also provide novel insights on the link between aesthetics, self-affirmation, openness, and risk taking.