Application of Behavioral Economics to Improve eConsult
NCT ID: NCT03784950
Last Updated: 2018-12-24
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
220 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2017-03-01
2018-08-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
SEQUENTIAL
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Rating tool only
Rating eConsults from peer specialists in first phase
Rating tool
eConsult Specialty Reviewers are asked to rate the quality of other specialists' recently completed eConsult exchanges on the following four dimensions: 1) efforts to elicit additional information from PCPs, when needed; 2) medical decision making; 3) inclusion of educational content for PCPs, when appropriate; 4) perceived effect on the PCP-specialist relationship (i.e., overall tone of the eConsult exchange)
Feedback only
Receiving feedback from peer specialists in first phase
Feedback
eConsult Specialty Reviewers receive confidential feedback via email on their performance (top performer vs not a top performer) as compared to colleagues in their specialty. Feedback is based on other reviewers ratings of their eConsult exchanges on the following four dimensions: 1) efforts to elicit additional information from PCPs, when needed; 2) medical decision making; 3) inclusion of educational content for PCPs, when appropriate; 4) perceived effect on the PCP-specialist relationship (i.e., overall tone of the eConsult exchange)
Rating Tool plus Feedback
Both rating and feedback in second phase.
Rating tool
eConsult Specialty Reviewers are asked to rate the quality of other specialists' recently completed eConsult exchanges on the following four dimensions: 1) efforts to elicit additional information from PCPs, when needed; 2) medical decision making; 3) inclusion of educational content for PCPs, when appropriate; 4) perceived effect on the PCP-specialist relationship (i.e., overall tone of the eConsult exchange)
Feedback
eConsult Specialty Reviewers receive confidential feedback via email on their performance (top performer vs not a top performer) as compared to colleagues in their specialty. Feedback is based on other reviewers ratings of their eConsult exchanges on the following four dimensions: 1) efforts to elicit additional information from PCPs, when needed; 2) medical decision making; 3) inclusion of educational content for PCPs, when appropriate; 4) perceived effect on the PCP-specialist relationship (i.e., overall tone of the eConsult exchange)
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Rating tool
eConsult Specialty Reviewers are asked to rate the quality of other specialists' recently completed eConsult exchanges on the following four dimensions: 1) efforts to elicit additional information from PCPs, when needed; 2) medical decision making; 3) inclusion of educational content for PCPs, when appropriate; 4) perceived effect on the PCP-specialist relationship (i.e., overall tone of the eConsult exchange)
Feedback
eConsult Specialty Reviewers receive confidential feedback via email on their performance (top performer vs not a top performer) as compared to colleagues in their specialty. Feedback is based on other reviewers ratings of their eConsult exchanges on the following four dimensions: 1) efforts to elicit additional information from PCPs, when needed; 2) medical decision making; 3) inclusion of educational content for PCPs, when appropriate; 4) perceived effect on the PCP-specialist relationship (i.e., overall tone of the eConsult exchange)
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Los Angeles County Department of Public Health
OTHER_GOV
University of Southern California
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Daniella Meeker
Assistant Professor
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Daniella Meeker, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
University of Southern California
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Los Angeles County Department of Health Services
Los Angeles, California, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Barnett ML, Yee HF Jr, Mehrotra A, Giboney P. Los Angeles Safety-Net Program eConsult System Was Rapidly Adopted And Decreased Wait Times To See Specialists. Health Aff (Millwood). 2017 Mar 1;36(3):492-499. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2016.1283.
Lee MS, Ray KN, Mehrotra A, Giboney P, Yee HF Jr, Barnett ML. Primary Care Practitioners' Perceptions of Electronic Consult Systems: A Qualitative Analysis. JAMA Intern Med. 2018 Jun 1;178(6):782-789. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.0738.
Behavioral Economics and eConsult Steering Committee; Meeker D, Friedberg MW, Knight TK, Doctor JN, Zein D, Cayasso-McIntosh N, Goldstein NJ, Fox CR, Linder JA, Persell SD, Dea S, Giboney P, Yee HF. Effect of Peer Benchmarking on Specialist Electronic Consult Performance in a Los Angeles Safety-Net: a Cluster Randomized Trial. J Gen Intern Med. 2022 May;37(6):1400-1407. doi: 10.1007/s11606-021-07002-1. Epub 2021 Sep 9.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
HS-17-00077
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id