Megastudy shows that reminders boost vaccination but adding free rides does not.

Encouraging routine COVID-19 vaccinations is likely to be a crucial policy challenge for decades to come. To avert hundreds of thousands of unnecessary hospitalizations and deaths, adoption will need to be higher than it was in the autumn of 2022 or 2023, when less than one-fifth of Americans received booster vaccines1,2. One approach to encouraging vaccination is to eliminate the friction of transportation hurdles. Previous research has shown that friction can hinder follow-through3 and that individuals who live farther from COVID-19 vaccination sites are less likely to get vaccinated4. However, the value of providing free round-trip transportation to vaccination sites is unknown. Here we show that offering people free round-trip Lyft rides to pharmacies has no benefit over and above sending them behaviourally informed text messages reminding them to get vaccinated. We determined this by running a megastudy with millions of CVS Pharmacy patients in the United States testing the effects of (1) free round-trip Lyft rides to CVS Pharmacies for vaccination appointments and (2) seven different sets of behaviourally informed vaccine reminder messages. Our results suggest that offering previously vaccinated individuals free rides to vaccination sites is not a good investment in the United States, contrary to the high expectations of both expert and lay forecasters. Instead, people in the United States should be sent behaviourally informed COVID-19 vaccination reminders, which increased the 30-day COVID-19 booster uptake by 21% (1.05 percentage points) and spilled over to increase 30-day influenza vaccinations by 8% (0.34 percentage points) in our megastudy. More rigorous testing of interventions to promote vaccination is needed to ensure that evidence-based solutions are deployed widely and that ineffective but intuitively appealing tools are discontinued.

Megastudies improve the impact of applied behavioural science.

Policy-makers are increasingly turning to behavioural science for insights about how to improve citizens' decisions and outcomes1. Typically, different scientists test different intervention ideas in different samples using different outcomes over different time intervals2. The lack of comparability of such individual investigations limits their potential to inform policy. Here, to address this limitation and accelerate the pace of discovery, we introduce the megastudy-a massive field experiment in which the effects of many different interventions are compared in the same population on the same objectively measured outcome for the same duration. In a megastudy targeting physical exercise among 61,293 members of an American fitness chain, 30 scientists from 15 different US universities worked in small independent teams to design a total of 54 different four-week digital programmes (or interventions) encouraging exercise. We show that 45% of these interventions significantly increased weekly gym visits by 9% to 27%; the top-performing intervention offered microrewards for returning to the gym after a missed workout. Only 8% of interventions induced behaviour change that was significant and measurable after the four-week intervention. Conditioning on the 45% of interventions that increased exercise during the intervention, we detected carry-over effects that were proportionally similar to those measured in previous research3-6. Forecasts by impartial judges failed to predict which interventions would be most effective, underscoring the value of testing many ideas at once and, therefore, the potential for megastudies to improve the evidentiary value of behavioural science.

Effect of Gamification, Financial Incentives, or Both to Increase Physical Activity Among Patients at High Risk of Cardiovascular Events: The BE ACTIVE Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Physical activity is associated with a lower risk of major adverse cardiovascular events, but few individuals achieve guideline-recommended levels of physical activity. Strategies informed by behavioral economics increase physical activity, but their longer-term effectiveness is uncertain. We sought to determine the effect of behaviorally designed gamification, loss-framed financial incentives, or their combination on physical activity compared with attention control over 12-month intervention and 6-month postintervention follow-up periods. METHODS: Between May 2019 and January 2024, participants with clinical atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease or a 10-year risk of myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular death of ≥7.5% by the Pooled Cohort equation were enrolled in a pragmatic randomized clinical trial. Participants received a wearable device to track daily steps, established a baseline, selected a step goal increase, and were randomly assigned to control (n=151), behaviorally designed gamification (n=304), loss-framed financial incentives (n=302), or gamification+financial incentives (n=305). The primary outcome of the trial was the change in mean daily steps from baseline through the 12-month intervention period. RESULTS: A total of 1062 patients (mean±SD age, 67±8; 61% female; 31% non-White) were enrolled. Compared with control subjects, participants had significantly greater increases in mean daily steps from baseline during the 12-month intervention in the gamification arm (adjusted difference, 538.0 [95% CI, 186.2-889.9]; P=0.0027), financial incentives arm (adjusted difference, 491.8 [95% CI, 139.6-844.1]; P=0.0062), and gamification+financial incentives arm (adjusted difference, 868.0 [95% CI, 516.3-1219.7]; P<0.0001). During the 6-month follow-up, physical activity remained significantly greater in the gamification+financial incentives arm than in the control arm (adjusted difference, 576.2 [95% CI, 198.5-954]; P=0.0028), but it was not significantly greater in the gamification (adjusted difference, 459.8 [95% CI, 82.0-837.6]; P=0.0171) or financial incentives (adjusted difference, 327.9 [95% CI, -50.2 to 706]; P=0.09) arms after adjustment for multiple comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: Behaviorally designed gamification, loss-framed financial incentives, and the combination of both increased physical activity compared with control over a 12-month intervention period, with the largest effect in gamification+financial incentives. These interventions could be a useful component of strategies to reduce cardiovascular risk in high-risk patients. REGISTRATION: URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov; Unique Identifier: NCT03911141.

A 680,000-person megastudy of nudges to encourage vaccination in pharmacies.

Encouraging vaccination is a pressing policy problem. To assess whether text-based reminders can encourage pharmacy vaccination and what kinds of messages work best, we conducted a megastudy. We randomly assigned 689,693 Walmart pharmacy patients to receive one of 22 different text reminders using a variety of different behavioral science principles to nudge flu vaccination or to a business-as-usual control condition that received no messages. We found that the reminder texts that we tested increased pharmacy vaccination rates by an average of 2.0 percentage points, or 6.8%, over a 3-mo follow-up period. The most-effective messages reminded patients that a flu shot was waiting for them and delivered reminders on multiple days. The top-performing intervention included two texts delivered 3 d apart and communicated to patients that a vaccine was "waiting for you." Neither experts nor lay people anticipated that this would be the best-performing treatment, underscoring the value of simultaneously testing many different nudges in a highly powered megastudy.

Food Is Medicine: A Presidential Advisory From the American Heart Association.

Unhealthy diets are a major impediment to achieving a healthier population in the United States. Although there is a relatively clear sense of what constitutes a healthy diet, most of the US population does not eat healthy food at rates consistent with the recommended clinical guidelines. An abundance of barriers, including food and nutrition insecurity, how food is marketed and advertised, access to and affordability of healthy foods, and behavioral challenges such as a focus on immediate versus delayed gratification, stand in the way of healthier dietary patterns for many Americans. Food Is Medicine may be defined as the provision of healthy food resources to prevent, manage, or treat specific clinical conditions in coordination with the health care sector. Although the field has promise, relatively few studies have been conducted with designs that provide strong evidence of associations between Food Is Medicine interventions and health outcomes or health costs. Much work needs to be done to create a stronger body of evidence that convincingly demonstrates the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different types of Food Is Medicine interventions. An estimated 90% of the $4.3 trillion annual cost of health care in the United States is spent on medical care for chronic disease. For many of these diseases, diet is a major risk factor, so even modest improvements in diet could have a significant impact. This presidential advisory offers an overview of the state of the field of Food Is Medicine and a road map for a new research initiative that strategically approaches the outstanding questions in the field while prioritizing a human-centered design approach to achieve high rates of patient engagement and sustained behavior change. This will ideally happen in the context of broader efforts to use a health equity-centered approach to enhance the ways in which our food system and related policies support improvements in health.

Two randomized controlled trials of nudges to encourage referrals to centralized pharmacy services for evidence-based statin initiation in high-risk patients: Rationale and design of the SUPER LIPID program.

BACKGROUND: In patients with or at risk for atherosclerotic vascular disease, statins reduce the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events, but the majority of US adults with an indication for statin therapy are not prescribed statins at guideline-recommended intensity. Clinicians' limited time to address preventative care issues is cited as one factor contributing to gaps in statin prescribing. Centralized pharmacy services can fulfill a strategic role for population health management through outreach, education, and statin prescribing for patients at elevated ASCVD risk, but best practices for optimizing referrals of appropriate patients are unknown. STUDY DESIGN AND OBJECTIVES: SUPER LIPID (NCT05537064) is a program consisting of two pragmatic clinical trials testing the effect of nudges in increasing referrals of appropriate patients to a centralized pharmacy service for lipid management, conducted within 11 primary care practices in a large community health system. In both trials, patients were eligible for inclusion if they had an assigned primary care provider (PCP) in a participating practice and were not prescribed a high- or moderate-intensity statin despite an indication, identified via an electronic health record (EHR) algorithm. Trial #1 was a stepped wedge trial, conducted at a single practice with randomization at the PCP level, of an interruptive EHR message that appeared during eligible patients' visits and facilitated referral to the pharmacy service. For the first 3 months, no PCPs received the message; for the second 3 months, half were randomly selected to receive the message; and for the last 3 months, all PCPs received the message. Trial #2 was a cluster-randomized trial conducted at 10 practices, with randomization at the practice level. Practices were randomized to usual care or to have eligible patients automatically referred to centralized pharmacy services via a referral order placed in PCPs EHR inboxes for co-signature. In both trials, when a patient was referred to centralized pharmacy services, a pharmacist reviewed the patient's chart, contacted the patient, and initiated statin therapy if the patient agreed. The primary endpoint of both trials was the proportion of patients prescribed a statin; secondary endpoints include the proportion of patients prescribed a statin at guideline-recommended intensity, the proportion of patients filling a statin prescription, and serum low-density lipoprotein level. CONCLUSIONS: SUPER LIPID is a pair of pragmatic clinical trials assessing the effectiveness of two strategies to encourage referral of appropriate patients to a centralized pharmacy service for lipid management. The trial results will develop the evidence base for simple, scalable, EHR-based strategies to integrate clinical pharmacists into population health management and increase appropriate statin prescribing. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov; NCT05537064.

A megastudy of text-based nudges encouraging patients to get vaccinated at an upcoming doctor's appointment.

Many Americans fail to get life-saving vaccines each year, and the availability of a vaccine for COVID-19 makes the challenge of encouraging vaccination more urgent than ever. We present a large field experiment (N = 47,306) testing 19 nudges delivered to patients via text message and designed to boost adoption of the influenza vaccine. Our findings suggest that text messages sent prior to a primary care visit can boost vaccination rates by an average of 5%. Overall, interventions performed better when they were 1) framed as reminders to get flu shots that were already reserved for the patient and 2) congruent with the sort of communications patients expected to receive from their healthcare provider (i.e., not surprising, casual, or interactive). The best-performing intervention in our study reminded patients twice to get their flu shot at their upcoming doctor's appointment and indicated it was reserved for them. This successful script could be used as a template for campaigns to encourage the adoption of life-saving vaccines, including against COVID-19.

A randomized controlled trial of gamification, financial incentives, or both to increase physical activity among patients with elevated risk for cardiovascular disease: rationale and design of the be active study.

BACKGROUND: Higher levels of physical activity are associated with improvements in cardiovascular health, and consensus guidelines recommend that individuals with or at risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) participate in regular physical activity. However, most adults do not achieve recommended levels of physical activity. Concepts from behavioral economics have been used to design scalable interventions that increase physical activity over short time periods, but the longer-term efficacy of these strategies is uncertain. STUDY DESIGN AND OBJECTIVES: BE ACTIVE (NCT03911141) is a pragmatic, virtual, randomized controlled trial designed to evaluate the effectiveness of 3 strategies informed by behavioral economic concepts to increase daily physical activity in patients with established ASCVD or 10-year ASCVD risk > 7.5% who are seen in primary care and cardiology clinics affiliated with the University of Pennsylvania Health System. Patients are contacted by email or text message, and complete enrollment and informed consent on the Penn Way to Health online platform. Patients are then provided with a wearable fitness tracker, establish a baseline daily step count, set a goal to increase daily step count by 33% to 50%, and are randomized 1:2:2:2 to control, gamification, financial incentives, or both gamification and financial incentives. Interventions continue for 12 months, with follow-up for an additional 6 months to evaluate the durability of behavior change. The trial has met its enrollment goal of 1050 participants, with a primary endpoint of change from baseline in daily steps over the 12-month intervention period. Key secondary endpoints include change from baseline in daily steps over the 6-month post-intervention follow-up period and change in moderate to vigorous physical activity over the intervention and follow-up periods. If the interventions prove effective, their effects on life expectancy will be compared with their costs in cost-effectiveness analysis. CONCLUSIONS: BE ACTIVE is a virtual, pragmatic randomized clinical trial powered to demonstrate whether gamification, financial incentives, or both are superior to attention control in increasing physical activity. Its results will have important implications for strategies to promote physical activity in patients with or at risk for ASCVD, as well as for the design and implementation of pragmatic virtual clinical trials within health systems.

Digital Health and Community Health Worker Support for Diabetes Management: a Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a digital health intervention plus community health worker (CHW) support on self-monitoring of blood glucose and glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) among adult Medicaid beneficiaries with diabetes. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Urban outpatient clinic. PARTICIPANTS: Adult Medicaid beneficiaries living with diabetes and treated with insulin and who had a HbA1c ≥ 9%. INTERVENTION: Participants were randomly assigned to one of three arms. Participants in the usual-care arm received a wireless glucometer if needed. Those in the digital arm received a lottery incentive for daily glucose monitoring. Those in the hybrid arm received the lottery plus support from a CHW if they had low adherence or high blood glucose levels. MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcome was the difference in adherence to daily glucose self-monitoring at 3 months between the hybrid and usual-care arms. The secondary outcome was difference in HbA1c from baseline at 6 months. KEY RESULTS: A total of 150 participants were enrolled in the study. A total of 102 participants (68%) completed the study. At 3 months, glucose self-monitoring rates in the hybrid versus usual-care arms were 0.72 vs 0.65, p = 0.23. At 6 months, change in HbA1c in the hybrid versus usual-care arms was - 0.74% vs - 0.49%, p = 0.69. CONCLUSION: There were no statistically significant differences between the hybrid and usual care in glucose self-monitoring adherence or improvements in HbA1C. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered with clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03939793.

Qualitative analysis of a remote monitoring intervention for managing heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure (HF) is one of the most common reasons for hospital admission and is a major cause of morbidity, mortality, and increasing health care costs. The EMPOWER study was a randomized trial that used remote monitoring technology to track patients' weight and diuretic adherence and a state-of-the-art approach derived from behavioral economics to motivate adherence to the reverse monitoring technology. OBJECTIVE: The goal was to explore patient and clinician perceptions of the program and its impact on perceived health outcomes and better understand why some patients or clinicians did better or worse than others in response to the intervention. APPROACH: This was a retrospective qualitative study utilizing semi-structured interviews with 43 patients and 16 clinicians to understand the trial's processes, reflecting on successes and areas for improvement for future iterations of behavioral economic interventions. KEY RESULTS: Many patients felt supported, and they appreciated the intervention. Many also appreciated the lottery intervention, and while it was not an incentive for enrolling for many respondents, it may have increased adherence during the study. Clinicians felt that the intervention integrated well into their workflow, but the number of alerts was burdensome. Additionally, responses to alerts varied considerably by provider, perhaps because there are no professional guidelines for alerts unaccompanied by severe symptoms. CONCLUSION: Our qualitative analysis indicates potential areas for additional exploration and consideration to design better behavioral economic interventions to improve cardiovascular health outcomes for patients with HF. Patients appreciated lottery incentives for adhering to program requirements; however, many were too far along in their disease progression to benefit from the intervention. Clinicians found the amount and frequency of electronic alerts burdensome and felt they did not improve patient outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02708654.

Do Incentives Crowd Out Motivation? A Feasibility Study of a Community Vector-Control Campaign in Peru.

Incentives are a useful tool in encouraging healthy behavior as part of public health initiatives. However, there remains concern about motivation crowd out-a decline in levels of motivation to undertake a behavior to below baseline levels after incentives have been removed-and few public health studies have assessed for motivation crowd out. Here, we assess the feasibility of identifying motivation crowd out following a lottery to promote participation in a Chagas disease vector control campaign. We look for evidence of crowd out in subsequent participation in the same behavior, a related behavior, and an unrelated behavior. We identified potential motivation crowd out for the same behavior, but not for related behavior or unrelated behaviors after lottery incentives are removed. Despite some limitations, we conclude that motivation crowd out is feasible to assess in large-scale trials of incentives.

Patient Safety Outcomes under Flexible and Standard Resident Duty-Hour Rules.

BACKGROUND: Concern persists that extended shifts in medical residency programs may adversely affect patient safety. METHODS: We conducted a cluster-randomized noninferiority trial in 63 internal-medicine residency programs during the 2015-2016 academic year. Programs underwent randomization to a group with standard duty hours, as adopted by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) in July 2011, or to a group with more flexible duty-hour rules that did not specify limits on shift length or mandatory time off between shifts. The primary outcome for each program was the change in unadjusted 30-day mortality from the pretrial year to the trial year, as ascertained from Medicare claims. We hypothesized that the change in 30-day mortality in the flexible programs would not be worse than the change in the standard programs (difference-in-difference analysis) by more than 1 percentage point (noninferiority margin). Secondary outcomes were changes in five other patient safety measures and risk-adjusted outcomes for all measures. RESULTS: The change in 30-day mortality (primary outcome) among the patients in the flexible programs (12.5% in the trial year vs. 12.6% in the pretrial year) was noninferior to that in the standard programs (12.2% in the trial year vs. 12.7% in the pretrial year). The test for noninferiority was significant (P = 0.03), with an estimate of the upper limit of the one-sided 95% confidence interval (0.93%) for a between-group difference in the change in mortality that was less than the prespecified noninferiority margin of 1 percentage point. Differences in changes between the flexible programs and the standard programs in the unadjusted rate of readmission at 7 days, patient safety indicators, and Medicare payments were also below 1 percentage point; the noninferiority criterion was not met for 30-day readmissions or prolonged length of hospital stay. Risk-adjusted measures generally showed similar findings. CONCLUSIONS: Allowing program directors flexibility in adjusting duty-hour schedules for trainees did not adversely affect 30-day mortality or several other measured outcomes of patient safety. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education; iCOMPARE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02274818.).

Sleep and Alertness in a Duty-Hour Flexibility Trial in Internal Medicine.

BACKGROUND: A purpose of duty-hour regulations is to reduce sleep deprivation in medical trainees, but their effects on sleep, sleepiness, and alertness are largely unknown. METHODS: We randomly assigned 63 internal-medicine residency programs in the United States to follow either standard 2011 duty-hour policies or flexible policies that maintained an 80-hour workweek without limits on shift length or mandatory time off between shifts. Sleep duration and morning sleepiness and alertness were compared between the two groups by means of a noninferiority design, with outcome measures including sleep duration measured with actigraphy, the Karolinska Sleepiness Scale (with scores ranging from 1 [extremely alert] to 9 [extremely sleepy, fighting sleep]), and a brief computerized Psychomotor Vigilance Test (PVT-B), with long response times (lapses) indicating reduced alertness. RESULTS: Data were obtained over a period of 14 days for 205 interns at six flexible programs and 193 interns at six standard programs. The average sleep time per 24 hours was 6.85 hours (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.61 to 7.10) among those in flexible programs and 7.03 hours (95% CI, 6.78 to 7.27) among those in standard programs. Sleep duration in flexible programs was noninferior to that in standard programs (between-group difference, -0.17 hours per 24 hours; one-sided lower limit of the 95% confidence interval, -0.45 hours; noninferiority margin, -0.5 hours; P = 0.02 for noninferiority), as was the score on the Karolinska Sleepiness Scale (between-group difference, 0.12 points; one-sided upper limit of the 95% confidence interval, 0.31 points; noninferiority margin, 1 point; P<0.001). Noninferiority was not established for alertness according to the PVT-B (between-group difference, -0.3 lapses; one-sided upper limit of the 95% confidence interval, 1.6 lapses; noninferiority margin, 1 lapse; P = 0.10). CONCLUSIONS: This noninferiority trial showed no more chronic sleep loss or sleepiness across trial days among interns in flexible programs than among those in standard programs. Noninferiority of the flexible group for alertness was not established. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and American Council for Graduate Medical Education; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02274818.).

A Pragmatic Trial of E-Cigarettes, Incentives, and Drugs for Smoking Cessation.

BACKGROUND: Whether financial incentives, pharmacologic therapies, and electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) promote smoking cessation among unselected smokers is unknown. METHODS: We randomly assigned smokers employed by 54 companies to one of four smoking-cessation interventions or to usual care. Usual care consisted of access to information regarding the benefits of smoking cessation and to a motivational text-messaging service. The four interventions consisted of usual care plus one of the following: free cessation aids (nicotine-replacement therapy or pharmacotherapy, with e-cigarettes if standard therapies failed); free e-cigarettes, without a requirement that standard therapies had been tried; free cessation aids plus $600 in rewards for sustained abstinence; or free cessation aids plus $600 in redeemable funds, deposited in a separate account for each participant, with money removed from the account if cessation milestones were not met. The primary outcome was sustained smoking abstinence for 6 months after the target quit date. RESULTS: Among 6131 smokers who were invited to enroll, 125 opted out and 6006 underwent randomization. Sustained abstinence rates through 6 months were 0.1% in the usual-care group, 0.5% in the free cessation aids group, 1.0% in the free e-cigarettes group, 2.0% in the rewards group, and 2.9% in the redeemable deposit group. With respect to sustained abstinence rates, redeemable deposits and rewards were superior to free cessation aids (P<0.001 and P=0.006, respectively, with significance levels adjusted for multiple comparisons). Redeemable deposits were superior to free e-cigarettes (P=0.008). Free e-cigarettes were not superior to usual care (P=0.20) or to free cessation aids (P=0.43). Among the 1191 employees (19.8%) who actively participated in the trial (the "engaged" cohort), sustained abstinence rates were four to six times as high as those among participants who did not actively engage in the trial, with similar relative effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: In this pragmatic trial of smoking cessation, financial incentives added to free cessation aids resulted in a higher rate of sustained smoking abstinence than free cessation aids alone. Among smokers who received usual care (information and motivational text messages), the addition of free cessation aids or e-cigarettes did not provide a benefit. (Funded by the Vitality Institute; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02328794 .).

Education Outcomes in a Duty-Hour Flexibility Trial in Internal Medicine.

BACKGROUND: Concern persists that inflexible duty-hour rules in medical residency programs may adversely affect the training of physicians. METHODS: We randomly assigned 63 internal medicine residency programs in the United States to be governed by standard duty-hour policies of the 2011 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) or by more flexible policies that did not specify limits on shift length or mandatory time off between shifts. Measures of educational experience included observations of the activities of interns (first-year residents), surveys of trainees (both interns and residents) and faculty, and intern examination scores. RESULTS: There were no significant between-group differences in the mean percentages of time that interns spent in direct patient care and education nor in trainees' perceptions of an appropriate balance between clinical demands and education (primary outcome for trainee satisfaction with education; response rate, 91%) or in the assessments by program directors and faculty of whether trainees' workload exceeded their capacity (primary outcome for faculty satisfaction with education; response rate, 90%). Another survey of interns (response rate, 49%) revealed that those in flexible programs were more likely to report dissatisfaction with multiple aspects of training, including educational quality (odds ratio, 1.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02 to 2.73) and overall well-being (odds ratio, 2.47; 95% CI, 1.67 to 3.65). In contrast, directors of flexible programs were less likely to report dissatisfaction with multiple educational processes, including time for bedside teaching (response rate, 98%; odds ratio, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.49). Average scores (percent correct answers) on in-training examinations were 68.9% in flexible programs and 69.4% in standard programs; the difference did not meet the noninferiority margin of 2 percentage points (difference, -0.43; 95% CI, -2.38 to 1.52; P=0.06 for noninferiority). od Institute and the ACGME; iCOMPARE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02274818 .). CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in the proportion of time that medical interns spent on direct patient care and education between programs with standard duty-hour policies and programs with more flexible policies. Interns in flexible programs were less satisfied with their educational experience than were their peers in standard programs, but program directors were more satisfied. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blo

Effect of Behavioral Economic Incentives for Colorectal Cancer Screening in a Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Financial incentives might increase participation in prevention such as screening colonoscopy. We studied whether incentives informed by behavioral economics increase participation in risk assessment for colorectal cancer (CRC) and completion of colonoscopy for eligible adults. METHODS: Employees of a large academic health system (50-64 y old; n = 1977) were randomly assigned to groups that underwent risk assessment for CRC screening and direct access colonoscopy scheduling (control), or risk assessment, direct access colonoscopy scheduling, a $10 loss-framed incentive to complete risk assessment, and a $25 unconditional incentive for colonoscopy completion (incentive). The primary outcome was the percentage of participants who completed screening colonoscopy within 3 months of initial outreach. Secondary outcomes included the percentage of participants who scheduled colonoscopy and the percentage who completed the risk assessment. RESULTS: At 3 months, risk assessment was completed by 19.5% of participants in the control group (95% CI, 17.0-21.9%) and 31.9% of participants in the incentive group (95% CI, 29.0-34.8%) (P < .001). At 3 months, 0.7% of controls had completed a colonoscopy (95% CI, .2%-1.2%) compared with 1.2% of subjects in the incentive group (95% CI, .5%-1.9%) (P = .25). CONCLUSIONS: In a randomized trial of participants who underwent risk assessment for CRC with vs without financial incentive, the financial incentive increased CRC risk assessment completion but did not result in a greater completion of screening colonoscopy. Clinicaltrials.gov no: NCT03068052.

Text Messaging and Opt-out Mailed Outreach in Colorectal Cancer Screening: a Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Routine screening reduces colorectal cancer mortality, but screening rates fall below national targets and are particularly low in underserved populations. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of a single text message outreach to serial text messaging and mailed fecal home test kits on colorectal cancer screening rates. DESIGN: A two-armed randomized clinical trial. PARTICIPANTS: An urban community health center in Philadelphia. Adults aged 50-74 who were due for colorectal cancer screening had at least one visit to the practice in the previously year, and had a cell phone number recorded. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomized (1:1 ratio). Individuals in the control arm were sent a simple text message reminder as per usual practice. Those in the intervention arm were sent a pre-alert text message offering the options to opt-out of receiving a mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) kit, followed by up to three behaviorally informed text message reminders. MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcome was participation in colorectal cancer screening at 12 weeks. The secondary outcome was the FIT kit return rate at 12 weeks. KEY RESULTS: Four hundred forty participants were included. The mean age was 57.4 years (SD ± 6.1). 63.4% were women, 87.7% were Black, 19.1% were uninsured, and 49.6% were Medicaid beneficiaries. At 12 weeks, there was an absolute 17.3 percentage point increase in colorectal cancer screening in the intervention arm (19.6%), compared to the control arm (2.3%, p < 0.001). There was an absolute 17.7 percentage point increase in FIT kit return in the intervention arm (19.1%) compared to the control arm (1.4%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Serial text messaging with opt-out mailed FIT kit outreach can substantially improve colorectal cancer screening rates in an underserved population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03479645 ).

Minimal SARS-CoV-2 Transmission After Implementation of a Comprehensive Mitigation Strategy at a School - New Jersey, August 20-November 27, 2020.

During fall 2020, many U.S. kindergarten through grade 12 (K-12) schools closed campuses and instituted remote learning to limit in-school transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19 (1,2). A New Jersey grade 9-12 boarding school with 520 full-time resident students, 255 commuter students, and 405 faculty and staff members implemented a comprehensive mitigation strategy that included universal masking, testing, upgraded air-handling equipment to improve ventilation, physical distancing of ≥6 ft, contact tracing, and quarantine and isolation protocols to prevent and control transmission of SARS-CoV-2 among students, faculty, and staff members. Mandatory twice-weekly screening using real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing of all students and staff members during August 20-November 27, 2020, resulted in the testing of 21,449 specimens. A total of 19 (5%) of 405 faculty and staff members and eight (1%) of 775 students received positive test results; only two identified cases were plausibly caused by secondary transmission on campus. Comprehensive mitigation approaches including frequent testing and universal masking can help prevent outbreaks in in-person high school settings even when community transmission is ongoing.

Hope, bias and survival expectations of advanced cancer patients: A cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: Many patients with advanced illness are unrealistically optimistic about their prognosis. We test for the presence of several cognitive biases, including optimism bias, illusion of superiority, self-deception, misattribution, and optimistic update bias, that could explain unrealistically optimistic prognostic beliefs among advanced cancer patients and quantifies the extent to which hope exacerbates these biases. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was administered to 200 advanced cancer patients with physician-estimated prognoses of one year or less. Hope was measured using the Herth Hope Index (HHI). Hypotheses were tested using linear and logistic regressions and a structural-equation model. RESULTS: Results are consistent with the presence of optimism bias, illusion of superiority, self-deception, and misattribution. All of these biases are amplified by higher levels of hope. Each 1-point higher HHI is associated with a 6% (OR: 1.06; 95% CI: 1.01-1.11) greater odds of believing their illness is curable, a 0.33-year (95% CI: 0.17-0.49) longer expected survival, a 6% (OR: 1.06; 95% CI: 1.02-1.11) higher probability of believing that survival outcomes are better than the average patient, a 5% higher odds of believing primary intent of treatment is curative (OR: 1.05; 95% CI: 1.00-1.10), and a 12% (OR: 1.12; 95% CI: 1.05-1.17) higher odds of believing they are well-informed. Mediation analyses revealed that hope significantly mediates the effect of mental-well-being and loneliness on expected survival. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest advanced cancer patients succumb to several cognitive biases which are exacerbated by greater levels of hope. As a result, they are susceptible to possible over-treatment and regret.

The Role of Behavioral Economics in Improving Cardiovascular Health Behaviors and Outcomes.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Behavioral economics represents a promising set of principles to inform the design of health-promoting interventions. Techniques from the field have the potential to increase quality of cardiovascular care given suboptimal rates of guideline-directed care delivery and patient adherence to optimal health behaviors across the spectrum of cardiovascular care delivery. RECENT FINDINGS: Cardiovascular health-promoting interventions have demonstrated success in using a wide array of principles from behavioral economics, including loss framing, social norms, and gamification. Such approaches are becoming increasingly sophisticated and focused on clinical cardiovascular outcomes in addition to health behaviors as a primary endpoint. Many approaches can be used to improve patient decisions remotely, which is particularly useful given the shift to virtual care in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Numerous applications for behavioral economics exist in the cardiovascular care delivery space, though more work is needed before we will have a full understanding of ways to best leverage such applications in each clinical context.