Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33522902›Full record

Trial reportEnvironmental health and preventive medicine2021

Increasing hepatitis virus screening uptake at worksites in Japan using nudge theory and full subsidies.

Jun Fukuyoshi, Masaaki Korenaga, Yui Yoshii, Lek Hong, Soichiro Kashihara, Byron Sigel, Toru Takebayashi

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Environmental health and preventive medicine, 2021. 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. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
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

7 authors.

Jun FukuyoshiDepartment of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, School of Medicine, Keio University, Shinanomachi, Tokyo, 160-8582, Japan.
Masaaki KorenagaHepatitis Information Center, The Research Center for Hepatitis and Immunology, National Center for Global Health and Medicine, Ichikawa, Chiba, 272-8516, Japan. dmkorenaga@hospk.ncgm.go.jp.
Yui YoshiiDepartment of Social and Preventive Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Graduate School of Medicine, Tokyo University, Hongo, Tokyo, 113-0033, Japan.
Lek HongDepartment of Policy Management, Keio University, Fujisawa, Kanagawa, 252-0882, Japan.
Soichiro KashiharaCancerscan, Co., Ltd., Shinagawa, Tokyo, 141-0031, Japan.
Byron SigelSchool of International Health, Graduate School of Medicine, Tokyo University, Hongo, Tokyo, 113-0033, Japan.
Toru TakebayashiDepartment of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, School of Medicine, Keio University, Shinanomachi, Tokyo, 160-8582, Japan.

Funding

Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare H26-kansei-ippan-001Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare H29-kansei-ippan-004
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite the importance of hepatitis screening for decreasing liver cancer mortality, screening rates remain low in Japan. Previous studies show that full subsidies increase screening uptake, but full subsidies are costly and difficult to implement in low-resource settings. Alternatively, applying nudge theory to the message design could increase screening at lower costs. This study examined the effects of both methods in increasing hepatitis virus screening rates at worksites.

methods1496 employees from a Japanese transportation company received client reminders for an optional hepatitis virus screening before their general health checkups. Groups A and B received a client reminder designed based on the principles of "Easy" and "Attractive," while the control group received a client reminder not developed using nudge theory. Additionally, hepatitis virus screening was offered to the control group and group A for a co-payment of JPY 612, but was fully subsidized for group B. The hepatitis virus screening rates among the groups were compared using a Chi-square test with Bonferroni correction, and the risk ratios of group A and group B to the control group were also calculated. To adjust for unobservable heterogeneity per cluster, the regression analysis was performed using generalized linear mixed models.

resultsThe screening rate was 21.2%, 37.1%, and 86.3% for the control group, group A, and group B, respectively. And the risk ratio for group A was 1.75 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.45-2.12) and that of group B was 4.08 (95% CI 3.44-4.83). The parameters of group A and group B also were significant when estimated using generalized linear mixed models. However, the cost-effectiveness (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER)) of the nudge-based reminder with the full subsidies was lower than that of only the nudge-based reminder.

conclusionsWhile fully subsidized screening led to the highest hepatitis screening rates, modifying client reminders using nudge theory significantly increased hepatitis screening uptake at lower costs per person.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisWorkplaceAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHepatitis VirusesHumansJapanMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedBehavioral sciencecancer screeningclient reminderHepatitis at worksitesHepatitis virus screeningMessage simplificationNudge

Identifiers

PMID33522902
PMCPMC7849075

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.