Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22471791›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2012

Should young people be paid for getting tested? A national comparative study to evaluate patient financial incentives for chlamydia screening.

Dominik Zenner, Darko Molinar, Tom Nichols, Johanna Riha, Mary Macintosh, Anthony Nardone

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Applying Behavioral Economics to Improve Adolescent and Young Adult Health: A Developmentally-Sensitive Approach.The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine · 2021
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Dominik ZennerHealth Protection Agency, Centre for Infections, London, UK. dominik.zenner@hpa.org.uk
Darko Molinar
Tom Nichols
Johanna Riha
Mary Macintosh
Anthony Nardone

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient financial incentives ("incentives") have been widely used to promote chlamydia screening uptake amongst 15-24 year olds in England, but there is scarce evidence of their effectiveness. The objectives of the study were to describe incentives used to promote chlamydia screening in Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) in England and to evaluate their impact on coverage and positivity rate.

methodsPCTs that had used incentives between 1/1/2007 and 30/6/2009 (exposed) were matched by socio-demographic profile and initial screening coverage with PCTs that had not (unexposed). For each PCT, percentage point change in chlamydia screening coverage and positivity for the period before and during the incentive was calculated. Differences in average change of coverage and positivity rate between exposed and unexposed PCTs were compared using linear regression to adjust for matching and potential confounders.

resultsIncentives had a significant effect in increasing average coverage in exposed PCTs (0.43%, CI 0.04%-0.82%). The effect for voucher schemes (2.35%) was larger than for prize draws (0.16%). The difference was greater in females (0.73%) than males (0.14%). The effect on positivity rates was not significant (0.07%, CI -1.53% to 1.67%).

conclusionsVouchers, but not prize draws, led to a small absolute but large relative increase in chlamydia screening coverage. Incentives increased coverage more in females than males but had no impact on reported positivity rates. These findings support recommendations not to use prize draws to promote chlamydia screening and contribute to the evidence base of the operational effectiveness of using patient incentives in encouraging public health action.

Indexed as

MotivationAdolescentAwards and PrizesChlamydia InfectionsEnglandFemaleHealth BehaviorHealth PromotionHumansMaleMass ScreeningNational Health ProgramsPatient Acceptance of Health CareReimbursement, IncentiveSex DistributionSocioeconomic Factors

Identifiers

PMID22471791
PMCPMC3350390

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.