Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
To compare the effects of lottery-based and fixed incentives on clinicians' response to surveys.Data sources
Three randomized trials with fixed payments and actuarially equivalent lotteries.Study design
Trial 1 compared a low-probability/high-payout lottery, a high-probability/low-payout lottery, and no incentive. Trial 2 compared a moderate-probability/moderate-payout lottery with an unconditional fixed payment (payment sent with questionnaire). Trial 3 compared a moderate-probability/moderate-payout lottery with a conditional fixed payment (payment promised following response).Principal findings
Neither the low-probability nor high-probability lotteries improved response compared with no incentive. Unconditional fixed payments produced significantly greater response than actuarially equivalent lotteries, but conditional fixed payments did not.Conclusions
Lottery-based incentives do not improve clinicians' response rates compared with no incentives, and they are inferior to unconditional fixed payments.
SUBMITTER: Halpern SD
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3207198 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Oct
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Halpern Scott D SD Kohn Rachel R Dornbrand-Lo Aaron A Metkus Thomas T Asch David A DA Volpp Kevin G KG
Health services research 20110414 5
<h4>Objective</h4>To compare the effects of lottery-based and fixed incentives on clinicians' response to surveys.<h4>Data sources</h4>Three randomized trials with fixed payments and actuarially equivalent lotteries.<h4>Study design</h4>Trial 1 compared a low-probability/high-payout lottery, a high-probability/low-payout lottery, and no incentive. Trial 2 compared a moderate-probability/moderate-payout lottery with an unconditional fixed payment (payment sent with questionnaire). Trial 3 compare ...[more]