Briana S. Last , Rinad S. Beidas , Katelin Hoskins , Claire R. Waller , Gabriela Kattan Khazanov
{"title":"A critical review of clinician-directed nudges","authors":"Briana S. Last , Rinad S. Beidas , Katelin Hoskins , Claire R. Waller , Gabriela Kattan Khazanov","doi":"10.1016/j.copsyc.2024.101856","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>As nudges—subtle changes to the way options are presented to guide choice—have gained popularity across policy domains in the past 15 years, healthcare systems and researchers have eagerly deployed these light-touch interventions to improve clinical decision-making. However, recent research has identified the limitations of nudges. Although nudges may modestly improve clinical decisions in some contexts, these interventions (particularly nudges implemented as electronic health record alerts) can also backfire and have unintended consequences. Further, emerging research on crowd-out effects suggests that healthcare nudges may direct attention and resources toward the clinical encounter and away from the main structural drivers of poor health outcomes. It is time to move beyond nudges and toward the development of multi-level, structurally focused interventions.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48279,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Psychology","volume":"59 ","pages":"Article 101856"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352250X24000691","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
As nudges—subtle changes to the way options are presented to guide choice—have gained popularity across policy domains in the past 15 years, healthcare systems and researchers have eagerly deployed these light-touch interventions to improve clinical decision-making. However, recent research has identified the limitations of nudges. Although nudges may modestly improve clinical decisions in some contexts, these interventions (particularly nudges implemented as electronic health record alerts) can also backfire and have unintended consequences. Further, emerging research on crowd-out effects suggests that healthcare nudges may direct attention and resources toward the clinical encounter and away from the main structural drivers of poor health outcomes. It is time to move beyond nudges and toward the development of multi-level, structurally focused interventions.
期刊介绍：
Current Opinion in Psychology is part of the Current Opinion and Research (CO+RE) suite of journals and is a companion to the primary research, open access journal, Current Research in Ecological and Social Psychology. CO+RE journals leverage the Current Opinion legacy of editorial excellence, high-impact, and global reach to ensure they are a widely-read resource that is integral to scientists' workflows.
Current Opinion in Psychology is divided into themed sections, some of which may be reviewed on an annual basis if appropriate. The amount of space devoted to each section is related to its importance. The topics covered will include:
* Biological psychology
* Clinical psychology
* Cognitive psychology
* Community psychology
* Comparative psychology
* Developmental psychology
* Educational psychology
* Environmental psychology
* Evolutionary psychology
* Health psychology
* Neuropsychology
* Personality psychology
* Social psychology
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
