NCT04982770

Brief Summary

The XPHI-COVID-2 randomized study aims to investigate the moral choices in a context of scarce resources. The participants are asked to complete the questionnaire of the Oxford Utilitarianism Scale and are exposed to medical triage dilemmas. Participants are randomized between a group with reading of ethical guidelines and a group without reading of ethical guidelines, before they are asked to complete the questionnaire and being exposed to triage dilemmas.

Trial Health

43
At Risk

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Trial has exceeded expected completion date
Enrollment
500

participants targeted

Target at P75+ for not_applicable

Timeline
Completed

Started Nov 2021

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
unknown

Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.

Trial Relationships

Click on a node to explore related trials.

Study Timeline

Key milestones and dates

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

July 23, 2021

Completed
6 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

July 29, 2021

Completed
3 months until next milestone

Study Start

First participant enrolled

November 1, 2021

Completed
11 months until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

October 1, 2022

Completed
1 month until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

November 1, 2022

Completed
Last Updated

September 13, 2022

Status Verified

October 1, 2021

Enrollment Period

11 months

First QC Date

July 23, 2021

Last Update Submit

September 8, 2022

Conditions

MoralsCovid19Ethics, Narrative

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

  • IH-OUS score

    Score on the Impartial Harm subscale of the Oxford Utilitarianism Scale (IH-OUS) : minimum value is 4 points and maximum value is 28 points. The higher the value is, the more the participant's choices endorse the principle of causing harm to bring the greater good.

    At the end of the inclusion period

Secondary Outcomes (13)

  • Utilitarian score

    At the end of the inclusion period

  • IB-OUS score

    At the end of the inclusion period

  • Oxford utilitarianism scale

    At the end of the inclusion period

  • Impartial of benefits

    At the end of the inclusion period

  • Prioritization of the young age

    At the end of the inclusion period

  • +8 more secondary outcomes

Study Arms (2)

Intervention

EXPERIMENTAL

The participants have to read ethical guidelines before they are asked to complete the questionnaire of the Oxford Utilitarianism Scale and exposed to medical triage dilemmas.

Other: Survey

No intervention

NO INTERVENTION

The participants do not have to read ethical guidelines before they are asked to complete the questionnaire of the Oxford Utilitarianism Scale and exposed to medical triage dilemmas.

Interventions

SurveyOTHER

Reading of ethical guidelines.

Intervention

Eligibility Criteria

Age18 Years+
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersYes
Age GroupsAdult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

  • Caregivers
  • Noncaregivers from general population

You may not qualify if:

  • Withdrawal of agreement

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (1)

Caen University Hospital

Caen, Calvados, 14000, France

RECRUITING

Related Publications (3)

  • Kahane G, Everett JAC, Earp BD, Caviola L, Faber NS, Crockett MJ, Savulescu J. Beyond sacrificial harm: A two-dimensional model of utilitarian psychology. Psychol Rev. 2018 Mar;125(2):131-164. doi: 10.1037/rev0000093. Epub 2017 Dec 21.

    PMID: 29265854BACKGROUND

  • Capraro, V., Earp, B.D., & Everett, J.A.C. (2019). Priming intuition disfavors instrumental harm but not impartial beneficence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 83, 142-149. DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2019.04.006.

    BACKGROUND

  • Emanuel EJ, Persad G, Upshur R, Thome B, Parker M, Glickman A, Zhang C, Boyle C, Smith M, Phillips JP. Fair Allocation of Scarce Medical Resources in the Time of Covid-19. N Engl J Med. 2020 May 21;382(21):2049-2055. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsb2005114. Epub 2020 Mar 23. No abstract available.

    PMID: 32202722BACKGROUND

MeSH Terms

Conditions

COVID-19Narration

Interventions

Surveys and Questionnaires

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Pneumonia, ViralPneumoniaRespiratory Tract InfectionsInfectionsVirus DiseasesCoronavirus InfectionsCoronaviridae InfectionsNidovirales InfectionsRNA Virus InfectionsLung DiseasesRespiratory Tract DiseasesCommunicationBehavior

Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Data CollectionEpidemiologic MethodsInvestigative TechniquesHealth Care Evaluation MechanismsQuality of Health CareHealth Care Quality, Access, and EvaluationPublic HealthEnvironment and Public Health

Study Officials

  • Clément GAKUBA, MD PhD

    University Hospital, Caen

    PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Central Study Contacts

Clément GAKUBA, MD PhD

CONTACT

+33231064736gakuba-c@chu-caen.fr

Florian COVA, PhD

CONTACT

Florian.Cova@unige.ch

Study Design

Study Type
interventional
Phase
not applicable
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Masking
TRIPLE
Who Masked
PARTICIPANT, INVESTIGATOR, OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
Purpose
OTHER
Intervention Model
PARALLEL
Sponsor Type
OTHER
Responsible Party
SPONSOR

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

July 23, 2021

First Posted

July 29, 2021

Study Start

November 1, 2021

Primary Completion

October 1, 2022

Study Completion

November 1, 2022

Last Updated

September 13, 2022

Record last verified: 2021-10

Data Sharing

IPD Sharing
Will not share

Locations

FR(1)