Non-Inferiority of Peer Comparison Interventions
2 other identifiers
observational
201
0 countries
N/A
Brief Summary
The objective of this study is to test the hypothesis that the Peer Comparison intervention in the Use of Behavioral Economics to Improve Treatment of Acute Respiratory Infections (BEARI) trial (Meeker et al. 2016) promoting antibiotic stewardship did not adversely impact physician job satisfaction as measured in the study exit survey at trial completion. Detrimental impacts on job satisfaction is a phenomenon that was observed in a randomized controlled trial using a Peer Comparison intervention with different characteristics from the BEARI trial. (Reiff et al. 2022) The BEARI trial sample size, intraclass correlation, and measurement of job satisfaction are comparable to Reiff et al. 2022.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P75+ for all trials
Started Nov 2011
Typical duration for all trials
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
Study Start
First participant enrolled
November 1, 2011
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
April 1, 2014
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
September 1, 2014
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
October 5, 2022
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
October 12, 2022
CompletedOctober 12, 2022
October 1, 2022
2.4 years
October 5, 2022
October 7, 2022
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
Job satisfaction
Impact of BEARI Peer Comparison intervention on Job Satisfaction, as measured by the following question completed as part of the BEARI trial exit survey: "Please indicate how much you agree or disagree with the following statement. Overall, I am satisfied with my current job."
18 months
Study Arms (2)
Peer Comparison
Providers from the BEARI trial who received the Peer Comparison intervention.
Control
Providers from the BEARI trial who did not receive the Peer Comparison intervention.
Interventions
Peer comparison was an email-based intervention. Clinicians were ranked from highest to lowest inappropriate prescribing rate within each region using EHR data. Clinicians with the lowest inappropriate prescribing rates (the top-performing decile) were told via monthly email they were "Top Performers". The remaining clinicians were told that they were "Not a Top Performer" in an email that included the number and proportion of antibiotic prescriptions they wrote for antibiotic-inappropriate acute respiratory tract infections, compared with the proportion written by top performers.
Eligibility Criteria
The study population includes all providers in the BEARI trial. The intent of the BEARI trial was to apply behavioral economic theory to reduce the rate of antibiotic prescriptions for acute respiratory diagnoses for which guidelines do not call for antibiotics.
You may qualify if:
- All providers included in the BEARI trial
You may not qualify if:
- N/A
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Related Publications (4)
Persell SD, Friedberg MW, Meeker D, Linder JA, Fox CR, Goldstein NJ, Shah PD, Knight TK, Doctor JN. Use of behavioral economics and social psychology to improve treatment of acute respiratory infections (BEARI): rationale and design of a cluster randomized controlled trial [1RC4AG039115-01]--study protocol and baseline practice and provider characteristics. BMC Infect Dis. 2013 Jun 27;13:290. doi: 10.1186/1471-2334-13-290.
PMID: 23806017BACKGROUNDMeeker D, Linder JA, Fox CR, Friedberg MW, Persell SD, Goldstein NJ, Knight TK, Hay JW, Doctor JN. Effect of Behavioral Interventions on Inappropriate Antibiotic Prescribing Among Primary Care Practices: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2016 Feb 9;315(6):562-70. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.0275.
PMID: 26864410BACKGROUNDReiff JS, Zhang JC, Gallus J, Dai H, Pedley NM, Vangala S, Leuchter RK, Goshgarian G, Fox CR, Han M, Croymans DM. When peer comparison information harms physician well-being. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2022 Jul 19;119(29):e2121730119. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2121730119. Epub 2022 Jul 14.
PMID: 35858307BACKGROUNDDoctor JN, Goldstein NJ, Fox CR, Linder JA, Persell SD, Stewart EP, Knight TK, Meeker D. Clinician Job Satisfaction After Peer Comparison Feedback: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Netw Open. 2023 Jun 1;6(6):e2317379. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.17379.
PMID: 37289454DERIVED
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Study Officials
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Jason Doctor, PhD
University of Southern California
Study Design
- Study Type
- observational
- Observational Model
- COHORT
- Time Perspective
- PROSPECTIVE
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
- PI Title
- Professor
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
October 5, 2022
First Posted
October 12, 2022
Study Start
November 1, 2011
Primary Completion
April 1, 2014
Study Completion
September 1, 2014
Last Updated
October 12, 2022
Record last verified: 2022-10