Exploring the Use of "Nudges" to Improve HIV and Other Sexually Transmitted Infection Testing Among Men Who Have Sex with Men.

Behavioral economics and its applied branch "nudging" can improve individual choices in various health care settings. However, there is a paucity of research using nudges to improve regular testing for HIV and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs). The study examined which reminder system and message type men who have sex with men (MSM) preferred to remind them to undergo regular 3-monthly HIV and STI testing. A cross-sectional survey study was conducted among MSM attending a sexual health clinic in Melbourne, Australia between 13 January and 5 March 2020, exploring the preferred method of reminder and framing of the message. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression were used to analyze the data. A total of 309 responses were received. The majority of the participants (90%) preferred short messaging service (SMS) as the reminder method for HIV/STI testing compared to other types (e.g., email or instant messaging). More than a third of the participants (45%) showed a preference for a neutrally framed reminder message (Your next check-up is now due. Please phone for an appointment), while one-third (35%) preferred a personalized message (Hi [first name], you are due for your next check-up. Please phone for an appointment). Younger men were more likely to favor positive framed messages than older men who favored neutrally framed messages (p < .01). SMS was the preferred reminder method for regular HIV/STI testing. Reminder messages that were neutrally framed, personalized or positive framed messages were preferred over negative or social norm messages.

Choice of methods can determine which behavioral determinates are identified for targeting in future behavior change interventions: Increasing antibiotic adherence in Pakistan.

When developing a behavioral intervention, formative research should be conducted to determine which behavioral barriers and facilitators to target. This is often done using qualitative interviews, but quantitative surveys may also be used. The current study examines the consequences of applying descriptive (rank order and t-tests) versus predictive (regression) quantitative analyses on intervention development, specifically for increasing antibiotic course completion. For demonstrative purposes, 1892 adults in Pakistan completed a cross-sectional survey that measures a comprehensive set of barriers/facilitators to their course completion. The descriptive and predictive analyses disagreed regarding which barriers/facilitators to prioritize. Reasons to prefer predictive analyses are discussed.