Trial reportScience advances2023
Can personalized digital counseling improve consumer search for modern contraceptive methods?
Trial report in Science advances, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reducing cognitive demand fails to mitigate choice overload: Multimodal neural and gaze evidence for effort conservation.iScience · 2026Article
- Automated Personalized Goal Setting for Individual Exercise Behavior: Protocol for a Web-Based Adaptive Intervention Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- Replicable Bandits for Digital Health Interventions.Statistical science : a review journal of the Institute of Mathematical Statistics · 2025Article
- Perspectives of Digital Health Innovations in Low- and Middle-Income Health Care Systems From South and Southeast Asia.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 7 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper analyzes a randomized controlled trial of a personalized digital counseling intervention addressing informational constraints and choice architecture, cross-randomized with discounts for long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs), such as intrauterine devices (IUDs). The counseling intervention encourages shared decision-making (SDM) using a tablet-based app, which provides a tailored ranking of modern methods to each client according to their elicited needs and preferences. Take-up of LARCs in the status quo regime at full price was 11%, which increased to 28% with discounts. SDM roughly tripled the share of clients adopting a LARC at full price to 35%, and discounts had no incremental impact in this group. Neither intervention affected the take-up of short-acting methods, such as the pill. Consistent with theoretical models of consumer search, SDM clients discussed more methods in depth, which led to higher adoption rates for second- or lower-ranked LARCs. Our findings suggest that low-cost individualized recommendations can potentially be as effective in increasing unfamiliar technology adoption as providing large subsidies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.