Default Option Nudging Intervention to Improve the Adherence Rates of Cancer Screening
26 de junho de 2026 atualizado por: Zhisheng Zheng, Harbin Medical University
Default Option Nudging Intervention to Improve the Adherence Rates of Cancer Screening in High-risk Population: Randomized Controlled Trial and Intervention Disclosure Analysis
The goal of this clinical trial is to learn if a behavioral "nudge" strategy, specifically a default option, can improve screening participation in populations at high risk for lung and stomach cancer. The main questions it aims to answer are:
- Does presenting a screening appointment as a default option increase the likelihood that high-risk individuals will choose to be screened?
- How do participants react, and what is their level of acceptance, when the nudge intervention is disclosed to them?
- Does this transparency (disclosing the nudge) change their subsequent screening decisions? Researchers will compare a default option group to a standard control group to see if the nudge effectively increases screening adherence.
Participants will:
- Read a short educational text about lung or stomach cancer and its screening.
- Complete an online questionnaire.
- Make a decision regarding a simulated cancer screening appointment.
- Read a disclosure explaining the behavioral nudge strategy used during the study.
- Re-evaluate their screening decision and answer questions regarding their attitude toward the nudge.
Visão geral do estudo
Status
Concluído
Condições
Intervenção / Tratamento
Tipo de estudo
Intervencional
Inscrição (Real)
1200
Estágio
- Não aplicável
Contactos e Locais
Esta seção fornece os detalhes de contato para aqueles que conduzem o estudo e informações sobre onde este estudo está sendo realizado.
Locais de estudo
-
-
Heilongjiang
-
Harbin, Heilongjiang, China, 150081
- Harbin Medical University
-
-
Critérios de participação
Os pesquisadores procuram pessoas que se encaixem em uma determinada descrição, chamada de critérios de elegibilidade. Alguns exemplos desses critérios são a condição geral de saúde de uma pessoa ou tratamentos anteriores.
Critérios de elegibilidade
Idades elegíveis para estudo
- Adulto
- Adulto mais velho
Aceita Voluntários Saudáveis
Sim
Descrição
Inclusion Criteria:
- High-risk population of lung cancer or gastric cancer.
- Lung cancer high-risk definition (based on the 2024 Lung Cancer Screening and Early Diagnosis and Treatment Program organized by the National Health Commission of the PRC): Age ≥50 years and pack-years of smoking ≥20, including former smoking ≥20 pack-years, but smoking cessation less than 15 years (Note: Pack-years of smoking = number of packs smoked per day × number of years smoked).
- Gastric cancer high-risk definition (based on the 2024 Gastric Cancer Screening and Early Diagnosis and Treatment Program organized by the National Health Commission of the PRC): Age ≥45 years old and living in areas with a high incidence of gastric cancer (Liaoning, Fujian, Gansu, Shandong, Jiangsu).
- Ability to read and comprehend simplified Chinese.
- The informed consent statement was read and confirmed.
Exclusion Criteria:
- Reading impairment preventing independent questionnaire completion.
- Failure to pass attention checks and logical consistency tests embedded within the questionnaire.
Plano de estudo
Esta seção fornece detalhes do plano de estudo, incluindo como o estudo é projetado e o que o estudo está medindo.
Como o estudo é projetado?
Detalhes do projeto
- Finalidade Principal: Pesquisa de serviços de saúde
- Alocação: Randomizado
- Modelo Intervencional: Atribuição Paralela
- Mascaramento: Dobro
Armas e Intervenções
Grupo de Participantes / Braço |
Intervenção / Tratamento |
|---|---|
|
Sem intervenção: control group (lung cancer screening)
Control group participants received neutral, informational content about lung cancer and screening.
This content included lung cancer's status as a leading cause of cancer mortality, the challenges of late-stage diagnosis, and LDCT as the gold standard screening method.
Participants were informed that high-risk individuals, particularly long-term smokers, require annual screening due to elevated cancer risk, with each participant explicitly told they qualified as high-risk due to their smoking history.
Meanwhile, CanSPUC and its purpose were also shown to the participants.
The screening participation question for controls was framed as: "We provide available time slots for free lung cancer screening.
You can directly view available appointment times and make reservations according to your preference.
Would you like to schedule lung cancer screening?"
|
|
|
Experimental: intervention group (lung cancer screening)
Intervention participants received the same neutral information plus a default option nudge.
The critical modification involved reframing the screening participation measure as: "We have already scheduled a free lung cancer screening appointment for you, which you can attend at your convenience.
If you do not wish to participate, please indicate below."
We also default to "Yes, I would like to make an appointment for lung cancer screening and see the available hours for lung cancer screening" for this question.
|
Participants in this arm are subjected to a behavioral "nudge" using a default option mechanism during a simulated online appointment process for cancer screening.
Instead of being asked to actively schedule an appointment (an opt-in approach), the screening appointment is presented to them as pre-selected or pre-scheduled (an opt-out approach).
Furthermore, to evaluate the ethical and behavioral impact of transparency, this intervention uniquely includes a "disclosure" phase: after the initial decision, participants are explicitly informed about the nudge strategy that was just applied to them, and their screening intention is immediately re-measured.
|
|
Sem intervenção: control group (gastric cancer screening)
Control group participants received neutral, informational content about gastric cancer and screening.
This content included gastric cancer's status as a cause of cancer mortality, the challenges of late-stage diagnosis, and endoscope as the gold standard screening method.
Participants were informed that high-risk individuals require screening per 5 years, with each participant explicitly told they qualified as high-risk due to their living regions.
Meanwhile, CanSPUC and its purpose were also shown to the participants.
The screening participation question for controls was framed as: "We provide available time slots for free gastric cancer screening.
You can directly view available appointment times and make reservations according to your preference.
Would you like to schedule gastric cancer screening?"
|
|
|
Experimental: intervention group (gastric cancer screening)
Intervention participants received the same neutral information plus a default option nudge.
The critical modification involved reframing the screening participation measure as: "We have already scheduled a free gastric cancer screening appointment for you, which you can attend at your convenience.
If you do not wish to participate, please indicate below."
We also default to "Yes, I would like to make an appointment for gastric cancer screening and see the available hours for lung cancer screening" for this question.
|
Participants in this arm are subjected to a behavioral "nudge" using a default option mechanism during a simulated online appointment process for cancer screening.
Instead of being asked to actively schedule an appointment (an opt-in approach), the screening appointment is presented to them as pre-selected or pre-scheduled (an opt-out approach).
Furthermore, to evaluate the ethical and behavioral impact of transparency, this intervention uniquely includes a "disclosure" phase: after the initial decision, participants are explicitly informed about the nudge strategy that was just applied to them, and their screening intention is immediately re-measured.
|
O que o estudo está medindo?
Medidas de resultados primários
Medida de resultado |
Descrição da medida |
Prazo |
|---|---|---|
|
Percentage of Participants Who Accept the Cancer Screening Appointment
Prazo: Immediately after the default option intervention
|
This outcome is assessed via a dichotomous choice (Yes/No) embedded in the simulated online scheduling system within the questionnaire.
The value reported will be the percentage of participants who choose to accept and schedule the screening appointment.
|
Immediately after the default option intervention
|
Medidas de resultados secundários
Medida de resultado |
Descrição da medida |
Prazo |
|---|---|---|
|
Participant Attitude Score Towards the Default Option Nudge
Prazo: Immediately after the disclosure of the intervention
|
This measure is assessed via a self-reported questionnaire using a Likert scale.
Scores range from 1 to 5, where 1 indicates a very negative attitude and 5 indicates a very positive attitude.
Higher scores represent a better attitude towards the nudge strategy.
|
Immediately after the disclosure of the intervention
|
|
Self-Reported Score of the Nudge's Influence on Decision-Making
Prazo: Immediately after the disclosure of the intervention
|
This measure is assessed via a self-reported questionnaire using a Likert scale.
Scores range from 1 to 5, where 1 indicates no influence and 5 indicates extreme influence.
Higher scores indicate that the participant felt the default option had a greater influence on their appointment decision.
|
Immediately after the disclosure of the intervention
|
|
Acceptance Score of the Default Option Nudge in Public Health Services
Prazo: Immediately after the disclosure of the intervention
|
This measure is assessed via a self-reported questionnaire using a Likert scale.
Scores range from 1 to 5, where 1 indicates completely unacceptable and 5 indicates completely acceptable.
Higher scores indicate higher social acceptance and suitability of using such behavioral nudges in public health promotion.
|
Immediately after the disclosure of the intervention
|
|
Percentage of Participants Who Accept the Appointment After Disclosure
Prazo: Immediately after the disclosure of the intervention
|
This outcome is assessed via a secondary dichotomous choice (Yes/No) presented after the participant reads the disclosure statement explaining the nudge.
The value reported is the percentage of participants who choose to accept the screening at this final stage.
|
Immediately after the disclosure of the intervention
|
Colaboradores e Investigadores
É aqui que você encontrará pessoas e organizações envolvidas com este estudo.
Patrocinador
Datas de registro do estudo
Essas datas acompanham o progresso do registro do estudo e os envios de resumo dos resultados para ClinicalTrials.gov. Os registros do estudo e os resultados relatados são revisados pela National Library of Medicine (NLM) para garantir que atendam aos padrões específicos de controle de qualidade antes de serem publicados no site público.
Datas Principais do Estudo
Início do estudo (Real)
27 de abril de 2025
Conclusão Primária (Real)
1 de junho de 2025
Conclusão do estudo (Real)
1 de junho de 2025
Datas de inscrição no estudo
Enviado pela primeira vez
23 de junho de 2026
Enviado pela primeira vez que atendeu aos critérios de CQ
26 de junho de 2026
Primeira postagem (Real)
2 de julho de 2026
Atualizações de registro de estudo
Última Atualização Postada (Real)
2 de julho de 2026
Última atualização enviada que atendeu aos critérios de controle de qualidade
26 de junho de 2026
Última verificação
1 de junho de 2026
Mais Informações
Termos relacionados a este estudo
Palavras-chave
Termos MeSH relevantes adicionais
- Neoplasias por local
- Neoplasias
- Doenças Respiratórias
- Neoplasias gastrointestinais
- Neoplasias do Aparelho Digestivo
- Doenças do aparelho digestivo
- Doenças Gastrointestinais
- Doenças do Estômago
- Doenças pulmonares
- Neoplasias do Trato Respiratório
- Neoplasias Torácicas
- Comportamento
- Adesão e Cumprimento do Tratamento
- Comportamento de saúde
- Aceitação dos Cuidados de Saúde pelo Paciente
- Neoplasias do Estômago
- Neoplasias Pulmonares
- Conformidade do paciente
Outros números de identificação do estudo
- HMUIRB2025029PRE
Plano para dados de participantes individuais (IPD)
Planeja compartilhar dados de participantes individuais (IPD)?
SIM
Descrição do plano IPD
All collected de-identified individual participant data (IPD) that underlie the results reported in the final publication.
This includes demographic characteristics, group allocation, behavioral screening decisions, and responses related to attitudes toward the disclosure intervention.
Prazo de Compartilhamento de IPD
Data will be available beginning 6 months and ending 36 months following the publication of the article.
Critérios de acesso de compartilhamento IPD
Researchers who provide a methodologically sound proposal.
Tipo de informação de suporte de compartilhamento de IPD
- PROTOCOLO DE ESTUDO
- SEIVA
- CIF
Informações sobre medicamentos e dispositivos, documentos de estudo
Estuda um medicamento regulamentado pela FDA dos EUA
Não
Estuda um produto de dispositivo regulamentado pela FDA dos EUA
Não
Essas informações foram obtidas diretamente do site clinicaltrials.gov sem nenhuma alteração. Se você tiver alguma solicitação para alterar, remover ou atualizar os detalhes do seu estudo, entre em contato com register@clinicaltrials.gov. Assim que uma alteração for implementada em clinicaltrials.gov, ela também será atualizada automaticamente em nosso site .