Order Effects of Prematurity Outcome Data

February 11, 2020 updated by: Medical College of Wisconsin

The Effect of Order of Presenting Survival and Disability Information for Periviable Births on Participant Treatment Choice

Women recruited from the internet were put in a hypothetical situation of being in labor at 22 weeks of pregnancy, and presented with information in the form of pictographs about survival and disability of babies born at this gestational age.

Participants were randomized to receive these pictographs in a different order (survival or disability first) and to receive descriptiveness level of survival (just numerical information, or also description of course of NICU stay).

Participants were then asked to choose between comfort care and intensive care in this situation. Participants' religiosity, value of the sanctity of life, and health literacy were also assessed.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Workshop on Periviable Birth recommended that information on the chance of survival and risk of disability should be provided separately. The order in which information is presented can affect memory, persuasiveness, and treatment choice, but the effect of order of information presentation in the context of neonatal resuscitation has received little attention. Additionally, the effect of including a description of the long and intense time in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) on parental treatment decision making is also unexplored. Current evidence suggests that pictographs best convey numerical information to parents.

Three pictographs were developed based on NICHD data for 22 weeks gestational age (GA) babies who received intensive care. One pictograph displayed information on the rates of disability in the babies who survive. Two pictographs displayed information about how many babies born at 22 weeks survive, with one of these pictographs including a description of the average course of NICU stay.

An internet survey was sent to a U.S. representative sample of women of child-bearing age. A vignette including background on prematurity and the treatment options of intensive care or comfort care for a baby born at 22 weeks GA was presented. Participants viewed the pictographs, evenly randomized to one of four experimental conditions (order of information presentation x level of description of NICU course). Participants were then asked to choose intensive care or comfort care. Participant religiosity, values (quality vs. sanctity of life), autonomy preferences in medical decision making, previous NICU exposure, numeracy, and health literacy were also assessed.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

839

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • Wisconsin
      • Milwaukee, Wisconsin, United States, 53226
        • Medical College of Wisconsin

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years to 50 years (Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Genders Eligible for Study

Female

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Women of childbearing age (defined as 18-50) living in the U.S.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Minors, those unable to read English, and those who only could complete the survey on their phone. (For formatting purposes, a tablet or computer was necessary.)

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Other
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Factorial Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Numerical survival, followed by disability information
Participants in this arm were presented with a pictograph displaying numerical survival information, followed by a pictograph displaying disability information.
The pictographs presented to participants about survival and disability were varied in the order in which they were presented (i.e. survival or disability information first).
The pictographs presented to participants about survival and disability were varied in the level of description provided in the survival pictograph (i.e. only numerical data, or also a description of course of NICU stay).
Experimental: Survival with description, followed by disability information
Participants in this arm were presented with a pictograph displaying survival information including the average course of stay in the NICU, followed by a pictograph displaying disability information.
The pictographs presented to participants about survival and disability were varied in the order in which they were presented (i.e. survival or disability information first).
The pictographs presented to participants about survival and disability were varied in the level of description provided in the survival pictograph (i.e. only numerical data, or also a description of course of NICU stay).
Experimental: Disability information, followed by numerical survival
Participants in this arm were presented with a pictograph displaying disability information, followed by a pictograph displaying numerical survival.
The pictographs presented to participants about survival and disability were varied in the order in which they were presented (i.e. survival or disability information first).
The pictographs presented to participants about survival and disability were varied in the level of description provided in the survival pictograph (i.e. only numerical data, or also a description of course of NICU stay).
Experimental: Disability information, followed by survival with description
Participants in this arm were presented with a pictograph displaying disability information, followed by a pictograph displaying survival information including the average course of stay in the NICU.
The pictographs presented to participants about survival and disability were varied in the order in which they were presented (i.e. survival or disability information first).
The pictographs presented to participants about survival and disability were varied in the level of description provided in the survival pictograph (i.e. only numerical data, or also a description of course of NICU stay).

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Hypothetical treatment choice
Time Frame: Assessed immediately post-intervention.
Participant's hypothetical treatment choice of either comfort care or intensive care. Participants were told: "Your doctor asks you what treatment option you want to choose," and given the options of "I would want the doctors to provide the baby intensive care / comfort care." This dichotomous variable is assessed for the frequency of each option chosen.
Assessed immediately post-intervention.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Religiosity
Time Frame: Assessed post-intervention, immediately after treatment choice.
Participants' religiosity was assessed using the Duke University Religion Index (5-item). Potential scores range from 5-27, with 27 being the most religious.
Assessed post-intervention, immediately after treatment choice.
Preference for medical autonomy
Time Frame: Assessed post-intervention, immediately after treatment choice.
Participants were asked on a 4-point scale their medical autonomy preferences, in the form of: "In making medical decisions: 1) I always prefer to have the doctor make decisions for me, 2) I would prefer to have the doctor make medical decisions for me most of the time, 3) I would prefer to make my own medical decisions most of the time, or 4) I always prefer to make my own decisions." Score ranging from 1-4, with 4 being the maximum preference for medical autonomy.
Assessed post-intervention, immediately after treatment choice.
Values: quality or sanctity of life
Time Frame: Assessed post-intervention, immediately after treatment choice.
Participants answered the following: "In making end-of-life decisions: 1) Quality of life is much more important than preserving life, 2) Quality of life is somewhat more important than preserving life, 3) Preserving life is somewhat more important than quality of life, or 4) Preserving life is much more important than quality of life." In the range of 1-4, a score of 4 indicated the greatest participant value of sanctity of life.
Assessed post-intervention, immediately after treatment choice.
Numeracy
Time Frame: Assessed post-intervention, immediately after treatment choice.
Participants' numeracy levels were assessed by using an adapted item from the Subjective Numeracy Scale: "How good are you at figuring out how much a $20 shirt will cost if it is 25% off? Extremely / Quite a bit / Somewhat / A little bit / Not at all." Participants who answered somewhat, a little bit, or not at all were considered to have low numeracy.
Assessed post-intervention, immediately after treatment choice.
Health literacy
Time Frame: Assessed post-intervention, immediately after treatment choice.
Participants' health literacy was assessed using the single-item Brief Health Literacy screening, which asks, "How confident are you filling out medical forms by yourself? Extremely / Quite a bit / Somewhat / A little bit / Not at all." Participants who answered somewhat, a little bit, or not at all were considered to have low health literacy.
Assessed post-intervention, immediately after treatment choice.
Previous NICU exposure
Time Frame: Assessed post-intervention, immediately after treatment choice.
Participants were also asked if they have previously had a child in the NICU, with yes/no answer options.
Assessed post-intervention, immediately after treatment choice.

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

December 23, 2019

Primary Completion (Actual)

December 27, 2019

Study Completion (Actual)

December 27, 2019

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

February 7, 2020

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

February 11, 2020

First Posted (Actual)

February 17, 2020

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

February 17, 2020

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

February 11, 2020

Last Verified

February 1, 2020

More Information

Terms related to this study

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Premature Birth

Clinical Trials on Order of pictographs provided to participants

Subscribe