Physical ActivityNCT03037658
Physical Activity Incentives
A study testing Offering a financial incentive to increase walking in people with Physical Activity, run by Stanford University at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
In this study, the investigators will test responsiveness of young, middle-aged, and older adults to a range of incentives, some of which provide rewards for the individual participants and others that offer rewards to other people or groups. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Physical Activity
- What is being tested?
- Offering a financial incentive to increase walking
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 450 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- Sep 2013to Mar 2017
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Adults aged 18 and older are being targeted. We aim to recruit equal numbers of men and women, but this is not a specific target. There are no racial or ethnic targets.
- Individuals who pass a phone screening that includes physical (PAR-Q) and cognitive (MMSE) measures are eligible for this study. These individuals must either answer "no" to all the questions on the Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire (PAR-Q) or receive verbal permission from their doctor. Additionally, they must also show no signs of cognitive impairment as indicated by scores greater than or equal to 23 points on the 26-point Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE).
Who cannot join
- We will not recruit minors (17 or younger) because this is a study of adult development.
- Individuals who answered "yes" on any questions of the PAR-Q and/or received a score less than or equal to 22 on the MMSE.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Life-span Development Lab
Stanford, California, 94305
About this study
In this study, the investigators will test responsiveness of young, middle-aged, and older adults to a range of incentives, some of which provide rewards for the individual participants and others that offer rewards to other people or groups. The investigators hypothesize that incentives are differentially effective for different age groups.
Read the detailed description
This study grounds a financial incentives intervention in well-documented age-related changes in motivation. The investigators consider these motivational shifts through the lens of socioemotional selectivity theory (SST, Carstensen, 2006). According to SST, perceived time horizons influence motivation across the life span. When time is perceived as expansive (typical of younger adults), exploration and achievement are prioritized, but when time horizons narrow (typical of older adults), emotional meaning and satisfaction are prioritized. Previous research has shown that socioemotional goals may influence decisions about healthcare plans and the effectiveness of motivational messages to increase physical activity (Löckenhoff \& Carstensen, 2007; Mikels et al., 2010; Notthoff \& Carstensen, 2013). Drawing on the tenets of SST, individuals may be more motivated to engage in physical activity when doing so aligns with socioemotional goals. For example, older adults may find physical activity most appealing when it promotes emotional meaning and satisfaction; in contrast, younger adults may find physical activity most appealing when it promotes exploration and achievement.
Recent work has shown that spending on others (termed "prosocial spending") can have greater emotional benefits than spending on oneself (Anik, Aknin, Norton, Dunn, \& Quoidbach, 2013; Dunn, Aknin, \& Norton, 2008). Extending this concept, the researchers posit that, in the context of financial incentives, earning for others may offer older adults a more emotionally meaningful alternative to individual financial incentives, which may, in turn, better support health behavior change for older adults. Because of the profound link between physical activity and risk for cardiovascular disease and stroke, and because previous research suggests that financial incentives are most effective for simple, well-defined, objectively measurable activities, the behavioral outcome of interest in this study focuses on walking measured by pedometer step counts (Scott \& Schurer, 2008). In addition, because SST postulates specifically about motivational priorities in younger relative to older adults, the investigators recruited adult participants of all ages. The researchers designed this study to test the effectiveness of prosocial relative to individual financial incentives for increasing walking in older and younger adults. Reasoning from SST, the investigators hypothesize that younger adults will be relatively more motivated by incentives that produce personal benefits (i.e. individual financial incentives), but older adults will be relatively more affected when incentives were more emotionally meaningful (i.e. benefit another person or social cause). The investigators also predict that, when given the choice of incentive, older adults will be more likely to choose to earn for others rather than to earn for themselves, relative to younger adults. In addition, the investigators will also test the effects of prosocial relative to individual financial incentives on intrinsic motivation for physical activity and behavioral maintenance (maintaining increased steps) once incentives are removed.
Community-residing adults aged 18 and older are recruited via advertisements on Internet bulletin boards and local newspapers to participate in a study that requires four visits to our laboratory and three weeks of pedometer wear in exchange for $50. Importantly, participants are unaware of the incentive component of this study. Once participants contact research staff to indicate their interest, they are phone screened for eligibility (see the eligibility criteria section of this entry).
During the first in-lab session, after providing informed consent, participants respond to a series of questionnaires using Qualtrics survey software. Participants are provided with a pedometer, instructed on its use, and asked to wear it each day. One week later, participants return to complete the second study session. Participants complete questionnaires while pedometer steps are downloaded. Participants are randomly assigned within age group and gender to one of five possible incentive conditions (which can be found in the arms and interventions section of this entry). One week later, participants return to the lab for the third study session where they complete questionnaires while pedometer steps are downloaded. All participants are told their average daily steps from the previous week and how this average relates to the first week's average. Participants in incentivized conditions who increase steps are told how much they earned. Participants in the personal condition and choice participants who elect to keep the earnings receive a check for the amount of their earnings. Participants in the loved one and charity conditions and choice participants who elect to give their earnings to a loved one or charity witness the research staff write a check for the amount of their earnings to their selected loved one or charity and enclose the check along with a cover letter into an envelope to be mailed. Participants in the incentivized conditions who do not increase steps were told that they did not earn any money. All participants in incentivized conditions are reminded that the incentive portion of the study is complete and that they will not earn money by changing steps the final week of the study. One week later, participants complete the final study session. Participants complete questionnaires while pedometer steps are downloaded. All participants are told their average daily steps from the previous week and how this average relates to the second week's average. At the end of the session, participants are debriefed, paid, and thanked for their participation.
- Conditions
- Physical Activity
- Being tested
- Offering a financial incentive to increase walking
- Keywords
- physical activity, walking, incentive, step count
- Medical subject headings
- Motor Activity
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Offering a financial incentive to increase walkingOther
After a baseline week of walking while wearing a pedometer, participants will be randomly assigned to one of the five conditions. In each of these conditions, participants will have the chance to earn .02/step for each additional step per day (on average across the week, above baseline levels). After a week of incentivized walking, participants will again be asked to wear the pedometer for one final week (with no incentive).
Because the investigators need a week of walking before the incentive week, it is important that participants do not know the specific incentive aspect at the beginning of the study. Therefore, the investigators will not disclose the incentive structure at the beginning of the study. The investigators will debrief participants at the end of the study, and they will be fully informed of the purposes of the study at that time.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Personal - self | Experimental | Participants had the opportunity to earn money for themselves by increasing their average steps per day. Receives: Other: Offering a financial incentive to increase walking |
| Prosocial - loved one | Experimental | Participants had the opportunity to earn money for a loved one of their choice by increasing their average steps per day. Receives: Other: Offering a financial incentive to increase walking |
| Prosocial - charity | Experimental | Participants had the opportunity to earn money for a charity of their choice by increasing their average steps per day. Receives: Other: Offering a financial incentive to increase walking |
| Choice | Experimental | Participants were given the choice to earn money either for themselves, a loved one, or a charity by increasing their average steps per day. Receives: Other: Offering a financial incentive to increase walking |
| Control | No intervention | Participants were not offered a financial incentive to increase their average steps per day. They simply wore the pedometer for three weeks. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change in average steps per day
Difference in average steps per day (from baseline week to incentive week)
Measured: Step count is measured via pedometer every day for three weeks
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted31 Jan 2017 (estimated)
- Study startSep 2013
- Primary completionMar 2017
- Study completionMar 2017
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (8)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Physical ActivityStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Stanford UniversityThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Factorial
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 450 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Stanford University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- National Institutes of Health (NIH)
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Laura L Carstensen, Stanford University
- Investigators
- Laura L Carstensen, PhD, Principal investigator, Stanford University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03037658
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- IRB-28280
- Status last verified
- Apr 2026
- First submitted
- 27 Jan 2017
- Last updated
- 24 Apr 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: The researchers will share de-identified participant data with other researchers.
Publications
Carstensen LL. The influence of a sense of time on human development. Science. 2006 Jun 30;312(5782):1913-5. doi: 10.1126/science.1127488.
PubMed 16809530Lockenhoff CE, Carstensen LL. Aging, emotion, and health-related decision strategies: motivational manipulations can reduce age differences. Psychol Aging. 2007 Mar;22(1):134-146. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.22.1.134.
PubMed 17385990Mikels JA, Lockenhoff CE, Maglio SJ, Goldstein MK, Garber A, Carstensen LL. Following your heart or your head: focusing on emotions versus information differentially influences the decisions of younger and older adults. J Exp Psychol Appl. 2010 Mar;16(1):87-95. doi: 10.1037/a0018500.
PubMed 20350046Notthoff N, Carstensen LL. Positive messaging promotes walking in older adults. Psychol Aging. 2014 Jun;29(2):329-341. doi: 10.1037/a0036748.
PubMed 24956001Anik L, Aknin LB, Norton MI, Dunn EW, Quoidbach J. Prosocial bonuses increase employee satisfaction and team performance. PLoS One. 2013 Sep 18;8(9):e75509. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0075509. eCollection 2013.
PubMed 24058691Dunn EW, Aknin LB, Norton MI. Spending money on others promotes happiness. Science. 2008 Mar 21;319(5870):1687-8. doi: 10.1126/science.1150952.
PubMed 18356530Scott A, Schurer S. Financial incentives, personal responsibility and prevention. Discussion paper comissioned by the National Health and Hospitals Reform Commission. 2008. Retrieved from: http://www.health.gov.au/internet/nhhrc/publishing.nsf/Content/discussion-papers
Raposo S, Hogan CL, Barnes JT, Chemudupati T, Carstensen LL. Leveraging goals to incentivize healthful behaviors across adulthood. Psychol Aging. 2021 Feb;36(1):57-68. doi: 10.1037/pag0000428. Epub 2020 Jul 6.
PubMed 32628030
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 24 Apr 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Physical Activity Incentives
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03037658
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- IRB-28280
- Conditions
- Physical Activity
- Keywords
- physical activity, walking, incentive, step count
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 450 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Stanford UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- National Institutes of Health (NIH)
- Study start
- Sep 2013
- Primary completion
- Mar 2017 (actual)
- Study completion
- Mar 2017 (actual)
- First posted
- 31 Jan 2017 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
In this study, the investigators will test responsiveness of young, middle-aged, and older adults to a range of incentives, some of which provide rewards for the individual participants and others that offer rewards to other people or groups. The investigators hypothesize that incentives are differentially effective for different age groups.
Detailed description
This study grounds a financial incentives intervention in well-documented age-related changes in motivation. The investigators consider these motivational shifts through the lens of socioemotional selectivity theory (SST, Carstensen, 2006). According to SST, perceived time horizons influence motivation across the life span. When time is perceived as expansive (typical of younger adults), exploration and achievement are prioritized, but when time horizons narrow (typical of older adults), emotional meaning and satisfaction are prioritized. Previous research has shown that socioemotional goals may influence decisions about healthcare plans and the effectiveness of motivational messages to increase physical activity (Löckenhoff \& Carstensen, 2007; Mikels et al., 2010; Notthoff \& Carstensen, 2013). Drawing on the tenets of SST, individuals may be more motivated to engage in physical activity when doing so aligns with socioemotional goals. For example, older adults may find physical activity most appealing when it promotes emotional meaning and satisfaction; in contrast, younger adults may find physical activity most appealing when it promotes exploration and achievement.
Recent work has shown that spending on others (termed "prosocial spending") can have greater emotional benefits than spending on oneself (Anik, Aknin, Norton, Dunn, \& Quoidbach, 2013; Dunn, Aknin, \& Norton, 2008). Extending this concept, the researchers posit that, in the context of financial incentives, earning for others may offer older adults a more emotionally meaningful alternative to individual financial incentives, which may, in turn, better support health behavior change for older adults. Because of the profound link between physical activity and risk for cardiovascular disease and stroke, and because previous research suggests that financial incentives are most effective for simple, well-defined, objectively measurable activities, the behavioral outcome of interest in this study focuses on walking measured by pedometer step counts (Scott \& Schurer, 2008). In addition, because SST postulates specifically about motivational priorities in younger relative to older adults, the investigators recruited adult participants of all ages. The researchers designed this study to test the effectiveness of prosocial relative to individual financial incentives for increasing walking in older and younger adults. Reasoning from SST, the investigators hypothesize that younger adults will be relatively more motivated by incentives that produce personal benefits (i.e. individual financial incentives), but older adults will be relatively more affected when incentives were more emotionally meaningful (i.e. benefit another person or social cause). The investigators also predict that, when given the choice of incentive, older adults will be more likely to choose to earn for others rather than to earn for themselves, relative to younger adults. In addition, the investigators will also test the effects of prosocial relative to individual financial incentives on intrinsic motivation for physical activity and behavioral maintenance (maintaining increased steps) once incentives are removed.
Community-residing adults aged 18 and older are recruited via advertisements on Internet bulletin boards and local newspapers to participate in a study that requires four visits to our laboratory and three weeks of pedometer wear in exchange for $50. Importantly, participants are unaware of the incentive component of this study. Once participants contact research staff to indicate their interest, they are phone screened for eligibility (see the eligibility criteria section of this entry).
During the first in-lab session, after providing informed consent, participants respond to a series of questionnaires using Qualtrics survey software. Participants are provided with a pedometer, instructed on its use, and asked to wear it each day. One week later, participants return to complete the second study session. Participants complete questionnaires while pedometer steps are downloaded. Participants are randomly assigned within age group and gender to one of five possible incentive conditions (which can be found in the arms and interventions section of this entry). One week later, participants return to the lab for the third study session where they complete questionnaires while pedometer steps are downloaded. All participants are told their average daily steps from the previous week and how this average relates to the first week's average. Participants in incentivized conditions who increase steps are told how much they earned. Participants in the personal condition and choice participants who elect to keep the earnings receive a check for the amount of their earnings. Participants in the loved one and charity conditions and choice participants who elect to give their earnings to a loved one or charity witness the research staff write a check for the amount of their earnings to their selected loved one or charity and enclose the check along with a cover letter into an envelope to be mailed. Participants in the incentivized conditions who do not increase steps were told that they did not earn any money. All participants in incentivized conditions are reminded that the incentive portion of the study is complete and that they will not earn money by changing steps the final week of the study. One week later, participants complete the final study session. Participants complete questionnaires while pedometer steps are downloaded. All participants are told their average daily steps from the previous week and how this average relates to the second week's average. At the end of the session, participants are debriefed, paid, and thanked for their participation.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Factorial
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 5
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Personal - self | Experimental | Other: Offering a financial incentive to increase walkingParticipants had the opportunity to earn money for themselves by increasing their average steps per day. |
| Prosocial - loved one | Experimental | Other: Offering a financial incentive to increase walkingParticipants had the opportunity to earn money for a loved one of their choice by increasing their average steps per day. |
| Prosocial - charity | Experimental | Other: Offering a financial incentive to increase walkingParticipants had the opportunity to earn money for a charity of their choice by increasing their average steps per day. |
| Choice | Experimental | Other: Offering a financial incentive to increase walkingParticipants were given the choice to earn money either for themselves, a loved one, or a charity by increasing their average steps per day. |
| Control | No intervention | –Participants were not offered a financial incentive to increase their average steps per day. They simply wore the pedometer for three weeks. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Adults aged 18 and older are being targeted. We aim to recruit equal numbers of men and women, but this is not a specific target. There are no racial or ethnic targets.
- Individuals who pass a phone screening that includes physical (PAR-Q) and cognitive (MMSE) measures are eligible for this study. These individuals must either answer "no" to all the questions on the Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire (PAR-Q) or receive verbal permission from their doctor. Additionally, they must also show no signs of cognitive impairment as indicated by scores greater than or equal to 23 points on the 26-point Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE).
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- We will not recruit minors (17 or younger) because this is a study of adult development.
- Individuals who answered "yes" on any questions of the PAR-Q and/or received a score less than or equal to 22 on the MMSE.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Offering a financial incentive to increase walkingAfter a baseline week of walking while wearing a pedometer, participants will be randomly assigned to one of the five conditions. In each of these conditions, participants will have the chance to earn .02/step for each additional step per day (on average across the week, above baseline levels). After a week of incentivized walking, participants will again be asked to wear the pedometer for one final week (with no incentive). Because the investigators need a week of walking before the incentive week, it is important that participants do not know the specific incentive aspect at the beginning of the study. Therefore, the investigators will not disclose the incentive structure at the beginning of the study. The investigators will debrief participants at the end of the study, and they will be fully informed of the purposes of the study at that time. | Other | Choice, Personal - self, Prosocial - charity, Prosocial - loved one |
Primary outcome
Change in average steps per day
Time frame: Step count is measured via pedometer every day for three weeks
Difference in average steps per day (from baseline week to incentive week)
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 24 Apr 2026.
- Background: PubMed 16809530Carstensen LL. The influence of a sense of time on human development. Science. 2006 Jun 30;312(5782):1913-5. doi: 10.1126/science.1127488.
- Background: PubMed 17385990Lockenhoff CE, Carstensen LL. Aging, emotion, and health-related decision strategies: motivational manipulations can reduce age differences. Psychol Aging. 2007 Mar;22(1):134-146. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.22.1.134.
- Background: PubMed 20350046Mikels JA, Lockenhoff CE, Maglio SJ, Goldstein MK, Garber A, Carstensen LL. Following your heart or your head: focusing on emotions versus information differentially influences the decisions of younger and older adults. J Exp Psychol Appl. 2010 Mar;16(1):87-95. doi: 10.1037/a0018500.
- Background: PubMed 24956001Notthoff N, Carstensen LL. Positive messaging promotes walking in older adults. Psychol Aging. 2014 Jun;29(2):329-341. doi: 10.1037/a0036748.
- Background: PubMed 24058691Anik L, Aknin LB, Norton MI, Dunn EW, Quoidbach J. Prosocial bonuses increase employee satisfaction and team performance. PLoS One. 2013 Sep 18;8(9):e75509. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0075509. eCollection 2013.
- Background: PubMed 18356530Dunn EW, Aknin LB, Norton MI. Spending money on others promotes happiness. Science. 2008 Mar 21;319(5870):1687-8. doi: 10.1126/science.1150952.
- BackgroundScott A, Schurer S. Financial incentives, personal responsibility and prevention. Discussion paper comissioned by the National Health and Hospitals Reform Commission. 2008. Retrieved from: http://www.health.gov.au/internet/nhhrc/publishing.nsf/Content/discussion-papers
- Derived from this study: PubMed 32628030Raposo S, Hogan CL, Barnes JT, Chemudupati T, Carstensen LL. Leveraging goals to incentivize healthful behaviors across adulthood. Psychol Aging. 2021 Feb;36(1):57-68. doi: 10.1037/pag0000428. Epub 2020 Jul 6.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. The researchers will share de-identified participant data with other researchers.
Related trials for Physical Activity
Active, not recruiting
Group Exercise Program Supported By Audiovisual Media During Hemodialysis
Chronic Kidney Failure, Hemodialysis
Recruiting
Sustainability of the Effects of an Adapted Physical Activity Program on Physical Fitness and Psycho-behavioral Factors in Patients With Chronic Diseases
Adapted Physical Activity, Smartwatches
RecruitingObservational study
Organizational Strategies and Psychosocial Skills for Maintaining Physical Activity After a Depressive Episode: a 3-month Post-rehabilitation Study.
Physical Activity, Depression Disorder
Enrolling by invitation
Physical Activity Interventions for Sleep Improvement and Sedative-Hypnotic Reduction in Middle-Aged and Older Adults: Investigating the Role of Sarcopenia
Insomnia Chronic, Hypnotics and Sedatives
Not yet recruiting
Effects of the 11 for Health Program on Physical Fitness and Health-Related Outcomes in Schoolchildren
Physical Fitness, Health
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Laura L Carstensen, PhD principal investigator
Stanford University
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Offering a financial incentive to increase walking in people with Physical Activity, run by Stanford University at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 24 Apr 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Change in average steps per day (time frame: Step count is measured via pedometer every day for three weeks). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT03037658, which also lists 8 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 24 Apr 2026; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 5 Nov 2026.