System-, teacher-, and student-level interventions for improving participation in online learning at scale in high schools.

Many school systems across the globe turned to online education during the COVID-19 pandemic. This context differs significantly from the prepandemic situation in which massive open online courses attracted large numbers of voluntary learners who struggled with completion. Students who are provided online courses by their high schools also have their behavior determined by actions of their teachers and school system. We conducted experiments to improve participation in online learning before, during, and right after the COVID-19 outbreak, with 1,151 schools covering more than 45,000 students in their final years of high school in Ecuador. These experiments tested light-touch interventions at scale, motivated by behavioral science, and were carried out at three levels: that of the system, teacher, and student. We find the largest impacts come from intervening at the system level. A cheap, online learning management system for centralized monitoring increased participation by 0.21 SD and subject knowledge by 0.13 SD relative to decentralized management. Centralized management is particularly effective for underperforming schools. Teacher-level nudges in the form of benchmarking emails, encouragement messages, and administrative reminders did not improve student participation. There was no significant impact of encouragement messages to students, or in having them plan and team-up with peers. Small financial incentives in the form of lottery prizes for finishing lessons did increase study time, but was less cost-effective, and had no significant impact on knowledge. The results show the difficulty in incentivizing online learning at scale, and a key role for central monitoring.

Being surveyed can change later behavior and related parameter estimates.

Does completing a household survey change the later behavior of those surveyed? In three field studies of health and two of microlending, we randomly assigned subjects to be surveyed about health and/or household finances and then measured subsequent use of a related product with data that does not rely on subjects' self-reports. In the three health experiments, we find that being surveyed increases use of water treatment products and take-up of medical insurance. Frequent surveys on reported diarrhea also led to biased estimates of the impact of improved source water quality. In two microlending studies, we do not find an effect of being surveyed on borrowing behavior. The results suggest that limited attention could play an important but context-dependent role in consumer choice, with the implication that researchers should reconsider whether, how, and how much to survey their subjects.

NAITRE study on the impact of conditional cash transfer on poor pregnancy outcomes in underprivileged women: protocol for a nationwide pragmatic cluster-randomised superiority clinical trial in France.

INTRODUCTION: Prenatal care is recommended during pregnancy to improve neonatal and maternal outcomes. Women of lower socioeconomic status (SES) are less compliant to recommended prenatal care and suffer a higher risk of adverse perinatal outcomes. Several attempts to encourage optimal pregnancy follow-up have shown controversial results, particularly in high-income countries. Few studies have assessed financial incentives to encourage prenatal care, and none reported materno-fetal events as the primary outcome. Our study aims to determine whether financial incentives could improve pregnancy outcomes in women with low SES in a high-income country. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This pragmatic cluster-randomised clinical trial includes pregnant women with the following criteria: (1) age above 18 years, (2) first pregnancy visit before 26 weeks of gestation and (3) belonging to a socioeconomically disadvantaged group. The intervention consists in offering financial incentives conditional on attending scheduled pregnancy follow-up consultations. Clusters are 2-month periods with random turnover across centres. A composite outcome of maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality is the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints include maternal or neonatal outcomes assessed separately, qualitative assessment of the perception of the intervention and cost-effectiveness analysis for which children will be followed to the end of their first year through the French health insurance database. The study started in June 2016, and based on an expected decrease in the primary endpoint from 18% to 14% in the intervention group, we plan to include 2000 women in each group. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was first gained on 28 September 2014. An independent data security and monitoring committee has been established. Results of the main trial and each of the secondary analyses will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02402855; pre-results.