Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31471827›Full record

ArticleJournal of behavioral medicine2020

Offering male endoscopists as decoy option to nudge disinclined women to have colorectal cancer screening.

S T Stoffel, R S Kerrison, I Vlaev, C von Wagner

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of behavioral medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. 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

4 authors.

S T StoffelResearch Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, WC1E 6BT, London, UK.
R S KerrisonResearch Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, WC1E 6BT, London, UK.
I VlaevWarwick Business School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
C von WagnerResearch Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, WC1E 6BT, London, UK. c.wagner@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-0124-0941

Funding

Cancer Research UK C1418/A14134
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Previous studies have shown that a large proportion of women invited for bowel cancer screening prefer endoscopists of the same gender. We tested whether women who are initially disinclined to undergo flexible sigmoidoscopy screening would be more willing to have the test with a female practitioner if they were also offered a decoy appointment with a male practitioner. We conducted two online experiments with women aged 35-54, living in England, who did not intend to undergo flexible sigmoidoscopy screening. In both experiments, women were randomised to two conditions: (1) control (appointment with a female endoscopist) and (2) decoy (two appointments to choose from, one with a male endoscopist and one with a female endoscopist). Experiment 1 (N = 302) verified the conditions for the decoy using a conventional intention scale, while experiment 2 (N = 300) tested how the presence of the decoy influences the likelihood of women choosing the appointment with the female practitioner in a discrete choice task. While experiment 1 showed that the presence of the decoy increased intentions to attend the appointment with the female practitioner (p = 0.02), experiment 2 confirmed that women were more likely to choose the appointment with the female endoscopist if they were also offered the decoy (p < 0.001). In both experiments, the presence of the decoy decreased perceived difficulty of the screening decision and cognitive effort required to make the decision. Offering disinclined women a male practitioner increased intention to have the test with an endoscopist of the same gender. This suggests that male screening practitioners can be used as decoy options to increase the likelihood that women choose female practitioners and facilitate the screening decision.

Indexed as

AdultColorectal NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerEnglandFemaleHumansIntentionMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedSigmoidoscopyAsymmetric dominance effectAttraction effectCancer screeningDecision makingDecoy effectEndoscopist genderGender preferencesNudgeOnline experiment

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.