x

Please fill out this short user survey of only 3 questions in order to help us improve the site. We appreciate your feedback!
The Good Outcomes of Bad News. A Randomized Field Experiment on Formatting Breast Cancer Screening Invitations
Last registered on April 09, 2018

Pre-Trial

Trial Information
General Information
Title
The Good Outcomes of Bad News. A Randomized Field Experiment on Formatting Breast Cancer Screening Invitations
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0002878
Initial registration date
April 09, 2018
Last updated
April 09, 2018 3:24 PM EDT
Location(s)
Region
Primary Investigator
Affiliation
University of Padova
Other Primary Investigator(s)
PI Affiliation
University of Varese Insubria
PI Affiliation
University of Venice
Additional Trial Information
Status
Completed
Start date
2017-01-23
End date
2017-04-01
Secondary IDs
Abstract
We ran a randomized field experiment to ascertain whether a costless manipulation of the informational content (restricted or enhanced information) and the framing (gain or loss framing) of the invitation letter to the breast cancer screening program of the Province of Messina (Sicily) affects the take-up rate.
External Link(s)
Registration Citation
Citation
bertoni, marco, Luca Corazzini and Silvana Robone. 2018. "The Good Outcomes of Bad News. A Randomized Field Experiment on Formatting Breast Cancer Screening Invitations ." AEA RCT Registry. April 09. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.2878-1.0.
Former Citation
bertoni, marco et al. 2018. "The Good Outcomes of Bad News. A Randomized Field Experiment on Formatting Breast Cancer Screening Invitations ." AEA RCT Registry. April 09. http://www.socialscienceregistry.org/trials/2878/history/27827.
Sponsors & Partners

There are documents in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access to this information.

Request Information
Experimental Details
Interventions
Intervention(s)
We ran a population-level randomized field experiment to ascertain whether a costless manipulation of the informational content (restricted or enhanced information) and the framing (gain or loss framing) of the invitation letter to the national breast cancer screening program affects the take-up rate.
Intervention Start Date
2017-02-13
Intervention End Date
2017-03-19
Primary Outcomes
Primary Outcomes (end points)
Screening take-up
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
Our outcome is a dummy for whether women choose to take part in the breast screening programme. The information is obtaiend from administrative records of ASP Messina.
Secondary Outcomes
Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
Experimental Design
Experimental Design
We randomly assign women enrolled in the breast cancer screening program to receive a different invitation letter. There are 5 treatment groups: baseline letter with no information about the consequences of breast cancer screening for women's health, letter with restricted positively framed information, restricted negatively framed information, enhanced positively framed information, enhanced negatively framed information.
Experimental Design Details
To experimentally assign women to the different treatment groups, we make use of the random allocation of subjects in the Messina screening program based on the date of having the mammography. Every year, eligible women are invited to have a mammography at the health care center serving the health district of residence. There are five health care centers in the Province, serving eight health districts; annually these health care centers offer sufficient mammography appointment slots for the target population. Slots are distributed throughout the year and the LHA invites eligible women to have a mammography on an available date. Importantly for our purposes, patients are randomly assigned to screening dates by the LHA computer system. Our manipulations affected women invited for screening during the 7th to 11th week of 2017, the dates being from February 13 to March 19. We sent a different invitation letter to women for each week.
Randomization Method
Randomization done in office by a computer of the ASP Messina
Randomization Unit
Individual.
Was the treatment clustered?
No
Experiment Characteristics
Sample size: planned number of clusters
Close to 6000 individuals allocated to 5 treatment groups
Sample size: planned number of observations
Close to 6000 individuals allocated to 5 treatment groups
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
Subjects are evenly distributed among the 5 treatment arms, leading to close to 1,200 observations per group.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
IRB
INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARDS (IRBs)
IRB Name
Ethical Committee of the Department of Economics, Ca’ Foscari University of Venice
IRB Approval Date
2017-11-14
IRB Approval Number
N/A
Post-Trial
Post Trial Information
Study Withdrawal
Intervention
Is the intervention completed?
Yes
Intervention Completion Date
March 19, 2017, 12:00 AM +00:00
Is data collection complete?
Yes
Data Collection Completion Date
March 19, 2017, 12:00 AM +00:00
Final Sample Size: Number of Clusters (Unit of Randomization)
6194 women
Was attrition correlated with treatment status?
No
Final Sample Size: Total Number of Observations
6194 women
Final Sample Size (or Number of Clusters) by Treatment Arms
Subjects are evenly distributed across treatment arms (i.e., there are close to 1,240 subjects per group).
Data Publication
Data Publication
Is public data available?
No
Program Files
Program Files
Reports, Papers & Other Materials
Relevant Paper(s)
Abstract
Citation
The good outcomes of bad news. A randomized field experiment on formatting breast cancer screening invitations. Joint with Luca Corazzini and Silvana Robone. HEDG Discussion Paper 17/27, November 2017.
REPORTS & OTHER MATERIALS