Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
JAMA Intern Med ; 181(11): 1479-1488, 2021 11 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34542553

ABSTRACT

Importance: Incentivizing research participation is controversial and variably regulated because of uncertainty regarding whether financial incentives serve as undue inducements by diminishing peoples' sensitivity to research risks or unjust inducements by preferentially increasing enrollment among underserved individuals. Objective: To determine whether incentives improve enrollment in real randomized clinical trials (RCTs) or serve as undue or unjust inducements. Design, Setting, and Participants: Two RCTs of incentives that were embedded in 2 parent RCTs, 1 comparing smoking cessation interventions (conducted at smoking cessation clinics in 2 health systems) and 1 evaluating an ambulation intervention (conducted across wards of the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania) included all persons eligible for the parent trials who did not have prior knowledge of the incentives trials. Recruitment occurred from September 2017 to August 2019 for the smoking trial and January 2018 through May 2019 for the ambulation trial; data were analyzed from January 2020 to July 2020. Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to incentives of $0, $200, or $500 for participating in the smoking cessation trial and $0, $100, or $300 for the ambulation trial. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome of each incentive trial was the proportion of people assigned to each recruitment strategy that consented to participate. Each trial was powered to test the hypotheses that incentives served neither as undue inducements (based on the interaction between incentive size and perceived research risk, as measured using a 10-point scale, on the primary outcome), nor unjust inducements (based on the interaction between incentive size and participants' self-reported income). Noninferiority methods were used to test whether the data were compatible with these 2 effects of incentives and superiority methods to compare the primary and other secondary outcomes. Results: There were a total of 654 participants (327 women [50.0%]; mean [SD] age, 50.6 [12.1] years; 394 Black/African American [60.2%], 214 White [32.7%], and 24 multiracial individuals [3.7%]) in the smoking trial, and 642 participants (364 women [56.7%]; mean [SD] age, 46.7 [15.6] years; 224 Black/African American [34.9%], 335 White [52.2%], and 5 multiracial individuals [0.8%]) in the ambulation trial. Incentives significantly increased consent rates among those in the smoking trial in 47 of 216 (21.8%), 78 of 217 (35.9%), and 104 of 221 (47.1%) in the $0, $200, and $500 groups, respectively (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] for each increase in incentive, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.34-2.17; P < .001). Incentives did not increase consent among those in the ambulation trial: 98 of 216 (45.4%), 102 of 212 (48.1%), and 92 of 214 (43.0%) in the $0, $100, and $300 groups, respectively (aOR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.64-1.22; P = .45). In neither trial was there evidence of undue or unjust inducement (upper confidence limits of ORs for undue inducement, 1.15 and 0.99; P < .001 showing noninferiority; upper confidence limits of ORs for unjust inducement, 1.21 and 1.26; P = .01 and P < .001, respectively). There were no significant effects of incentive size on the secondary outcomes in either trial, including time spent reviewing the risk sections of consent forms, perceived research risks, trial understanding, perceived coercion, or therapeutic misconceptions. Conclusions and Relevance: In these 2 randomized clinical trials, financial incentives increased trial enrollment in 1 of 2 trials and did not produce undue or unjust inducement or other unintended consequences in either trial. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02697799.


Subject(s)
Motivation , Patient Selection , Research Subjects/psychology , Smoking Cessation , Walking/psychology , Control Groups , Depressive Disorder, Major/psychology , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Motivation/classification , Motivation/ethics , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Reward , Smoking Cessation/methods , Smoking Cessation/psychology
2.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(3): e210952, 2021 03 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33760089

ABSTRACT

Importance: Hospitalization is associated with decreased mobility and functional decline. Behaviorally designed gamification can increase mobility in community settings but has not been tested among patients at risk for functional decline during a high-risk transition period after hospitalization. Objective: To test a behaviorally designed gamification intervention with a social support partner to increase patient mobility after hospital discharge. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study is a randomized clinical trial of a 12-week intervention without follow-up. Enrollment occurred from January 2018 to June 2019 at a referral hospital with a remote at-home monitoring intervention among patients living predominantly in 3 states (Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware). Participants included adult patients discharged from general medicine and oncology units to home. Data analysis was performed from October 2019 to March 2020. Interventions: All participants received a wearable device to track daily steps. The control group received feedback from the device but no other interventions. The intervention group entered into a 12-week game informed by behavioral economics to assign points and levels for achieving step goals and reinforced by a support partner who received updates on participant progress. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was change in mean daily steps from baseline through the 12-week intervention. Secondary measures were change in functional status and urgent care utilization (ie, emergency department visits and hospital readmissions) within this period. Results: A total of 232 participants were enrolled in the study (118 randomized to control and 114 randomized to the intervention). Participants had a mean (SD) age of 40 (14) years, 141 (61%) were female, 101 (43%) were White, and 103 (44%) had an annual household income less than $50 000. Daily step counts increased from 3795 to 4652 steps (difference, 857 steps; 95% CI, 488 to 1224 steps) among intervention participants and increased from 3951 to 4499 steps (difference, 548 steps; 95% CI, 193 to 903 steps) among control participants. The change in mean daily step count from baseline was not significantly different for participants in the intervention group vs the control group (adjusted difference, 270 steps; 95% CI, -214 to 754 steps; P = .27). Among the subgroup of 76 participants with higher levels of social engagement, post hoc exploratory analyses showed a significant increase in mobility for intervention vs control (adjusted difference, 1125 steps; 95% CI, 409 to 1841 steps; P = .002). Fewer participants in this subgroup experienced functional decline (1 of 36 participants [4%] in the intervention group vs 5 of 40 participants [12%] in the control group) and hospital readmission at 30 days (3 of 36 participants [8%] in the intervention group vs 6 of 40 participants [15%] in the control group), but the differences were not statistically significant. There were no significant differences in these secondary outcomes for the overall sample. Conclusions and Relevance: Gamification with social incentives did not affect mobility or functional decline in all participants, but post hoc analysis suggests positive findings for both outcomes for patients with higher social engagement. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03321279.


Subject(s)
Behavior Therapy/methods , Patient Discharge , Social Support , Walking , Adult , Female , Games, Recreational , Humans , Male , Middle Aged
5.
JAMA Netw Open ; 2(11): e1914393, 2019 11 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31675083

ABSTRACT

Importance: Identifying effective strategies for treating obesity is a public health priority. Objective: To test an escalating lottery-based incentive tied to daily self-weighing for weight loss maintenance. Design, Setting, and Participants: This 2-phase, 2-arm randomized clinical trial enrolled participants aged 30 to 80 years with an initial body mass index (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) of 30.0 to 45.0 who lost at least 5 kg during 4 to 6 months in a national online weight management program. Study investigators and outcomes assessors were blinded to participant groups. Data were collected and analyzed from May 23, 2016, through November 13, 2017, based on intention to treat. Interventions: All participants were advised to weigh themselves daily, with a goal of 6 or more days per week, and received text messaging feedback on their performance. Incentive group participants were eligible for a lottery-based incentive worth an expected value of $3.98 in week 1 that escalated by $0.43 each week they achieved their self-weighing goal during months 1 to 6 (phase 1), followed by no incentives during months 7 to 12 (phase 2). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was weight change at the end of phase 1. Secondary outcomes included weight change at the end of phase 2 and changes in self-reported physical activity and eating behaviors. Results: A total of 258 participants (128 in the incentive group and 130 in the control group) had a mean (SD) age of 48.0 (10.5) years and mean (SD) body mass index of 32.1 (3.9); 225 (87.2%) were women; 235 (91.1%) were white; and 102 (39.5%) had an annual income of at least $100 000. Weight measurement was transmitted by 250 participants (96.9%) at 6 months and 227 (88.0%) at 12 months. The percentage of weeks that incentive and control participants achieved a mean self-weighing of at least 6 times was 85.3% vs 75.8%, respectively (P = .002) in phase 1 and 37.7% vs 50.2%, respectively (P = .009) in phase 2. Mean weight changes at the end of phase 1 were -1.1 (95% CI, -2.1 to -0.1) kg in the incentive group and -1.9 (95% CI, -2.9 to -0.8) kg in the control group, with a mean difference of 0.7 (95% CI, -0.7 to 2.2) kg (P = .30 for comparison). At the end of phase 2, mean weight changes were 0.2 (95% CI, -1.2 to 1.7) kg in the incentive group and -0.6 (95% CI, -2.0 to 0.8) kg in the control group, with a mean difference of 0.8 (95% CI, -1.2 to 2.8) kg (P = .41 for comparison). Conclusions and Relevance: Compared with an active control condition of weekly messages, escalating lottery-based incentives transiently increased rates of self-weighing but did not significantly enhance weight loss maintenance. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01900392.


Subject(s)
Body Weight Maintenance , Reward , Weight Loss , Weight Reduction Programs , Body Mass Index , Exercise , Feeding Behavior , Female , Health Behavior , Humans , Internet , Male , Middle Aged , Motivation , Self Report , Walking
6.
Contemp Clin Trials ; 76: 1-8, 2019 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30414865

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The most common and conceptually sound ethical concerns with financial incentives for research participation are that they may (1) represent undue inducements by blunting peoples' perceptions of research risks, thereby preventing fully informed consent; or (2) represent unjust inducements by encouraging enrollment preferentially among the poor. Neither of these concerns has been shown to manifest in studies testing the effects of incentives on decisions to participate in hypothetical randomized clinical trials (RCTs), but neither has been assessed in real RCTs. METHODS AND ANALYSES: We are conducting randomized trials of real incentives embedded within two parent RCTs. In each of two trials conducted in parallel, we are randomizing 576 participants to one of three incentive groups. Following preliminary determination of patients' eligibility in the parent RCT, we assess patients' research attitudes, demographic characteristics, perceived research risks, time spent reviewing consent documents, ability to distinguish research from patient care, and comprehension of key trial features. These quantitative assessments will be supplemented by semi-structured interviews for a selected group of participants that more deeply explore patients' motivations for trial participation. The trials are each designed to have adequate power to rule out undue and unjust inducement. We are also exploring potential benefits of incentives, including possible increased attention to research risks and cost-effectiveness.


Subject(s)
Decision Making , Informed Consent , Motivation/ethics , Patient Participation , Patient Selection/ethics , Attitude to Health , Coercion , Comprehension , Humans , Perception , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Research Subjects , Risk , Therapeutic Misconception
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...