Candace D Speight, Charlie Gregor, Yi-An Ko, Stephanie A Kraft, Andrea R Mitchell, Nyiramugisha K Niyibizi, Bradley G Phillips, Kathryn M Porter, Seema K Shah, Jeremy Sugarman, Benjamin S Wilfond, Neal W Dickert
{"title":"重新建构招聘:评估研究联络计划授权的框架。","authors":"Candace D Speight, Charlie Gregor, Yi-An Ko, Stephanie A Kraft, Andrea R Mitchell, Nyiramugisha K Niyibizi, Bradley G Phillips, Kathryn M Porter, Seema K Shah, Jeremy Sugarman, Benjamin S Wilfond, Neal W Dickert","doi":"10.1080/23294515.2021.1887962","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The changing clinical research recruitment landscape involves practical challenges but introduces opportunities. Researchers can now identify large numbers of eligible patients through electronic health record review and can directly contact those who have authorized contact. Applying behavioral science-driven strategies to design and frame communication could affect patients' willingness to authorize contact and their understanding of these programs. The ethical and practical implications of various strategies warrant empirical evaluation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted an online survey (<i>n</i> = 1070) using a nationally-representative sample. Participants were asked to imagine being asked for authorization for research contact in clinic. They were randomly assigned to view one of three flyers: #1-neutral text flyer; #2-a positive text flyer; or #3-positive graphics-based flyer. Primary outcomes included likelihood of enrollment and comprehension of the program. Chi-Square tests and regression analyses were used to examine whether those who saw the positive flyers were more likely to enroll and had increased comprehension.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared to the neutral flyer, individuals who received the positive text flyer were numerically more likely to enroll, but this was not statistically significant (24.2% v. 19.0%, <i>p</i> = 0.11). Individuals who received the positive graphics flyer were more likely to enroll (28.7% v. 19.0%, <i>p</i> = 0.002). After adjustment, individuals assigned to both novel flyers had increased odds of being likely to enroll (OR = 1.55 95%CI [1.04, 2.31] and OR = 1.95 95%CI [1.31, 2.91]). Flyer type did not affect overall comprehension (<i>p</i> = 0.21), and greater likelihood of enrollment was observed only in individuals with better comprehension.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study demonstrated that employing behavioral science-driven communication strategies for authorization for research contact had an effect on likelihood of hypothetical enrollment but did not significantly affect comprehension. Strategies using simple, positive language and visual tools may be effective and ethically appropriate. Further studies should explore how these and other approaches can help to optimize research recruitment.</p>","PeriodicalId":38118,"journal":{"name":"AJOB Empirical Bioethics","volume":" ","pages":"206-213"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10788686/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reframing Recruitment: Evaluating Framing in Authorization for Research Contact Programs.\",\"authors\":\"Candace D Speight, Charlie Gregor, Yi-An Ko, Stephanie A Kraft, Andrea R Mitchell, Nyiramugisha K Niyibizi, Bradley G Phillips, Kathryn M Porter, Seema K Shah, Jeremy Sugarman, Benjamin S Wilfond, Neal W Dickert\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/23294515.2021.1887962\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The changing clinical research recruitment landscape involves practical challenges but introduces opportunities. Researchers can now identify large numbers of eligible patients through electronic health record review and can directly contact those who have authorized contact. Applying behavioral science-driven strategies to design and frame communication could affect patients' willingness to authorize contact and their understanding of these programs. The ethical and practical implications of various strategies warrant empirical evaluation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted an online survey (<i>n</i> = 1070) using a nationally-representative sample. Participants were asked to imagine being asked for authorization for research contact in clinic. They were randomly assigned to view one of three flyers: #1-neutral text flyer; #2-a positive text flyer; or #3-positive graphics-based flyer. Primary outcomes included likelihood of enrollment and comprehension of the program. Chi-Square tests and regression analyses were used to examine whether those who saw the positive flyers were more likely to enroll and had increased comprehension.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared to the neutral flyer, individuals who received the positive text flyer were numerically more likely to enroll, but this was not statistically significant (24.2% v. 19.0%, <i>p</i> = 0.11). Individuals who received the positive graphics flyer were more likely to enroll (28.7% v. 19.0%, <i>p</i> = 0.002). After adjustment, individuals assigned to both novel flyers had increased odds of being likely to enroll (OR = 1.55 95%CI [1.04, 2.31] and OR = 1.95 95%CI [1.31, 2.91]). Flyer type did not affect overall comprehension (<i>p</i> = 0.21), and greater likelihood of enrollment was observed only in individuals with better comprehension.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study demonstrated that employing behavioral science-driven communication strategies for authorization for research contact had an effect on likelihood of hypothetical enrollment but did not significantly affect comprehension. Strategies using simple, positive language and visual tools may be effective and ethically appropriate. Further studies should explore how these and other approaches can help to optimize research recruitment.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":38118,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AJOB Empirical Bioethics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"206-213\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10788686/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AJOB Empirical Bioethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/23294515.2021.1887962\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/3/15 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AJOB Empirical Bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23294515.2021.1887962","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/3/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:不断变化的临床研究招聘环境涉及实际挑战,但也带来了机遇。研究人员现在可以通过电子健康记录审查识别大量符合条件的患者,并可以直接联系那些获得授权的联系人。应用行为科学驱动的策略来设计和框架沟通可以影响患者授权接触的意愿和他们对这些计划的理解。各种策略的伦理和实践意义值得实证评估。方法:我们使用具有全国代表性的样本进行了一项在线调查(n = 1070)。参与者被要求想象被要求在诊所进行研究接触的授权。他们被随机分配观看三份传单中的一份:#1-中性文字传单;#2-积极的文字传单;或者#3-积极的基于图形的传单。主要结果包括入组的可能性和对项目的理解。卡方检验和回归分析被用来检验那些看到积极传单的人是否更有可能报名参加,并提高了理解能力。结果:与中性传单相比,收到积极文本传单的个体在数字上更有可能注册,但这没有统计学意义(24.2% vs . 19.0%, p = 0.11)。收到正面图片传单的个体更有可能报名参加(28.7% vs . 19.0%, p = 0.002)。调整后,被分配到两种新型飞行器上的个体被招募的几率增加(OR = 1.55 95%CI[1.04, 2.31]和OR = 1.95 95%CI[1.31, 2.91])。飞行者类型不影响整体理解(p = 0.21),只有在理解能力较好的个体中才观察到更大的入组可能性。结论:本研究表明,采用行为科学驱动的沟通策略授权研究接触对假设入组的可能性有影响,但对理解没有显著影响。使用简单、积极的语言和视觉工具的策略可能有效且符合道德规范。进一步的研究应该探索这些方法和其他方法如何有助于优化研究招聘。
Reframing Recruitment: Evaluating Framing in Authorization for Research Contact Programs.
Background: The changing clinical research recruitment landscape involves practical challenges but introduces opportunities. Researchers can now identify large numbers of eligible patients through electronic health record review and can directly contact those who have authorized contact. Applying behavioral science-driven strategies to design and frame communication could affect patients' willingness to authorize contact and their understanding of these programs. The ethical and practical implications of various strategies warrant empirical evaluation.
Methods: We conducted an online survey (n = 1070) using a nationally-representative sample. Participants were asked to imagine being asked for authorization for research contact in clinic. They were randomly assigned to view one of three flyers: #1-neutral text flyer; #2-a positive text flyer; or #3-positive graphics-based flyer. Primary outcomes included likelihood of enrollment and comprehension of the program. Chi-Square tests and regression analyses were used to examine whether those who saw the positive flyers were more likely to enroll and had increased comprehension.
Results: Compared to the neutral flyer, individuals who received the positive text flyer were numerically more likely to enroll, but this was not statistically significant (24.2% v. 19.0%, p = 0.11). Individuals who received the positive graphics flyer were more likely to enroll (28.7% v. 19.0%, p = 0.002). After adjustment, individuals assigned to both novel flyers had increased odds of being likely to enroll (OR = 1.55 95%CI [1.04, 2.31] and OR = 1.95 95%CI [1.31, 2.91]). Flyer type did not affect overall comprehension (p = 0.21), and greater likelihood of enrollment was observed only in individuals with better comprehension.
Conclusions: This study demonstrated that employing behavioral science-driven communication strategies for authorization for research contact had an effect on likelihood of hypothetical enrollment but did not significantly affect comprehension. Strategies using simple, positive language and visual tools may be effective and ethically appropriate. Further studies should explore how these and other approaches can help to optimize research recruitment.