TelehealthNCT04332614

Email Campaign to Increase Uptake of myGeisinger

An observational study of Telehealth and Health Behavior, run by Geisinger Clinic at 1 site in United States.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Trial summary

The purpose of the current study is to test different email messages to determine the most effect way of promoting enrollment in Geisinger's patient portal, called myGeisinger. Read more about this study

Who is it for?: Ages 18 to 88 years
Conditions the study is for: Telehealth, Health Behavior
What is being tested?: Less-is-better, Social proof and Endowment / decision staging
Type of treatment: Lifestyle or therapy programme
How many people: 14,099 participants
Where: 1 siteUnited States
Study dates: 6 Apr 2020to 8 May 2020
Phase: Observational
Are there results?: Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view

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 to 88 years
All sexes
No healthy volunteers
Adult, Older adult

Study population: The population consists of Geisinger patients whose myGeisinger status is "Pending" and who have an email address on file.

Who may be able to join

Geisinger patients whose myGeisinger status is "Pending", meaning an activation code has been generated for them, but they have not completed activation

Who cannot join

Patients without email addresses on file
Patients who received emails from this monthly myGeisinger marketing campaign within the last 2 months

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

United States1 site

Geisinger
Danville, Pennsylvania, 17822

Other trials in United States

About this study

Official title: Email Campaign to Encourage Patients to Complete Sign-up Process for Geisinger's Patient Portal

The purpose of the current study is to test different email messages to determine the most effect way of promoting enrollment in Geisinger's patient portal, called myGeisinger.

Read the detailed description

Online patient portals are convenient tools that improve patient access to healthcare services while often reducing burden to both patients and providers. However, fewer than half of patients have enrolled in Geisinger's patient portal, myGeisinger.

The purpose of the current study is to assess what kind of messaging improves the effectiveness of an email campaign targeted at enrolling patients into Geisinger's online patient portal, called myGeisinger. Currently, Geisinger sends an email every month to patients who have started but not completed the enrollment process (they have had an activation code generated but have not yet used that code to enroll). This study will A/B test 5 email messages to assess if they perform better than the current standard email message.

Performance will be assessed based on whether patients open the email, click on the myGeisinger enrollment link, and enroll in myGeisinger. Statistical analyses will employ generalized linear models with a binary distribution and log-link function.

Conditions: Telehealth, Health Behavior
Being tested: Less-is-better, Social proof, Endowment / decision staging, Standard email
Keywords: Behavioral Economics, Patient Portal, Social Proof, Endowment Effect, Less-is-better
Medical subject headings: Health Behavior

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

Less-is-betterBehavioural
Email
Social proofBehavioural
Email
Endowment / decision stagingBehavioural
Email
Standard emailBehavioural
Email

Study groups in NCT04332614
Study group	Role	What they receive
Control		A standard marketing message encouraging activation and describing the benefits of myGeisinger Receives: Behavioral: Standard email
Focused on provider communication		A simple message focused on one benefit of myGeisinger: communicating easily with providers Receives: Behavioral: Less-is-better
Focused on scheduling		A simple message focused on one benefit of myGeisinger: scheduling and managing appointments online Receives: Behavioral: Less-is-better
Focused on medical information access		A simple message focused on one benefit of myGeisinger: accessing medical information, like test results Receives: Behavioral: Less-is-better
Social proof		A message similar to control, but including information about how many other patients are using myGeisinger Receives: Behavioral: Social proof
Endowment / decision staging		A message similar to control, but framing myGeisinger as something that patients already have, and just need to take one more step to activate. Endowment: Give patients the impression they already have the account, so they value it more. Decision staging: Break down the process into multiple stages - "having" an account and "activating" that account- and giving the impression that they are almost there because the first stage is complete Receives: Behavioral: Endowment / decision staging

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

Email Opened: Control vs. Less-is-better vs. Social Proof vs. Endowment
Whether email was opened (yes / no)
Measured: 8-10 days post-intervention
Link Clicked: Control vs. Less-is-better vs. Social Proof vs. Endowment
Whether the link / button to start the activation process was clicked (yes / no)
Measured: 8-10 days post-intervention
Enrollment: Control vs. Less-is-better vs. Social Proof vs. Endowment
Whether the patient enrolled in myGeisinger (yes / no)
Measured: 8-10 days post-intervention

Secondary outcomes (9)

Email Opened: Control vs. Less-is-better vs. Social Proof vs. Endowment
Whether email was opened (yes / no)
Measured: 32-35 days post-intervention
Link Clicked: Control vs. Less-is-better vs. Social Proof vs. Endowment
Whether the link / button to start the activation process was clicked (yes / no)
Measured: 32-35 days post-intervention
Enrollment: Control vs. Less-is-better vs. Social Proof vs. Endowment
Whether the patient enrolled in myGeisinger (yes / no)
Measured: 32-35 days post-intervention
Email Opened: Within Less-is-better (Provider Communication vs. Managing Appointments vs. Medical Information Access)
Whether email was opened (yes / no)
Measured: 8-10 days post-intervention
Link Clicked: Within Less-is-better (Provider Communication vs. Managing Appointments vs. Medical Information Access)
Whether the link / button to start the activation process was clicked (yes / no)
Measured: 8-10 days post-intervention
Enrollment: Within Less-is-better (Provider Communication vs. Managing Appointments vs. Medical Information Access)
Whether the patient enrolled in myGeisinger (yes / no)
Measured: 8-10 days post-intervention
Email Opened: Within Less-is-better (Provider Communication vs. Managing Appointments vs. Medical Information Access)
Whether email was opened (yes / no)
Measured: 32-35 days post-intervention
Link Clicked: Within Less-is-better (Provider Communication vs. Managing Appointments vs. Medical Information Access)
Whether the link / button to start the activation process was clicked (yes / no)
Measured: 32-35 days post-intervention
Enrollment: Within Less-is-better (Provider Communication vs. Managing Appointments vs. Medical Information Access)
Whether the patient enrolled in myGeisinger (yes / no)
Measured: 32-35 days post-intervention

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

6 Apr 20208 May 2020

First posted2 Apr 2020
Study start6 Apr 2020
Primary completion13 Apr 2020
Study completion8 May 2020

Resources

Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
Other trials for TelehealthStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
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: Observational
Observational model: Case-control
Time perspective: Prospective
Enrolment: 14,099 participants (actual)

IDs, dates and publications

ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04332614
Sponsor's protocol ID: 2020-0315
Status last verified: Apr 2021
First submitted: 31 Mar 2020
Last updated: 3 May 2021
Results posted: Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
FDA-regulated drug: No
FDA-regulated device: No
Individual data sharing: Yes: Data with no personally identifiable information will be made available to other researchers on the Open Science Framework for transparency. This will include the essential data and code needed to replicate the analysis that yielded reported findings.

Want to know more?

The sponsor has not listed a contact. The official record may have more details.

Talk to your doctor first and take this page with you. Only the study team can confirm whether you can join.

Questions to ask the study team

What is the study trying to find out?
What would I need to do, and how often would I visit?
Could I receive a placebo instead of the treatment?
What are the possible risks and benefits for me?
Will it cost me anything? Are travel or time paid for?
Can I keep seeing my own doctor during the study?
What happens when the study ends?

See locations

Recruiting
Tele-HOPE: A Telehealth Pharmacist Opioid Patient Education Pilot Study
Hematopoietic and Lymphatic System Neoplasm, Malignant Solid Neoplasm
Recruiting
Telerehabilitation Compared With Clinic-Based Physiotherapy in Children With Spastic Cerebral Palsy
Spastic Cerebral Palsy
Recruiting
Scalable TELeheaLth Cancer CARe: The STELLAR Program to Treat Cancer Risk Behaviors
Obesity, Smoking Cessation
Active, not recruiting
Enhancing Telemedicine for T2D
Type 2 Diabetes
Recruiting
The Impact of Telemedicine, Using the Caller's Mobile Phone Camera, on the Quality of Care Provided to Adult Patients Contacting the 15 Centre for Acute Dyspnea
Dyspnea

All Telehealth trials

Study at a glance

From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 3 May 2021. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.

Official title: Email Campaign to Encourage Patients to Complete Sign-up Process for Geisinger's Patient Portal
ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04332614
Acronym / sponsor ID: 2020-0315
Conditions: Telehealth, Health Behavior
Keywords: Behavioral Economics, Patient Portal, Social Proof, Endowment Effect, Less-is-better
Study type: Observational
Recruitment status: Completed
Enrolment: 14,099 participants (actual)
Lead sponsor: Geisinger ClinicUniversity, hospital or other
Study start: 6 Apr 2020 (actual)
Primary completion: 13 Apr 2020 (actual)
Study completion: 8 May 2020 (actual)
First posted: 2 Apr 2020 (actual)
Results: Posted 3 May 2021

Clinical summary

The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.

The purpose of the current study is to test different email messages to determine the most effect way of promoting enrollment in Geisinger's patient portal, called myGeisinger.

Detailed description

Study design

Observational model: Case-control
Time perspective: Prospective
Number of arms: 6

Arm	Type	Receives
Control	–	Behavioral: Standard emailA standard marketing message encouraging activation and describing the benefits of myGeisinger
Focused on provider communication	–	Behavioral: Less-is-betterA simple message focused on one benefit of myGeisinger: communicating easily with providers
Focused on scheduling	–	Behavioral: Less-is-betterA simple message focused on one benefit of myGeisinger: scheduling and managing appointments online
Focused on medical information access	–	Behavioral: Less-is-betterA simple message focused on one benefit of myGeisinger: accessing medical information, like test results
Social proof	–	Behavioral: Social proofA message similar to control, but including information about how many other patients are using myGeisinger
Endowment / decision staging	–	Behavioral: Endowment / decision stagingA message similar to control, but framing myGeisinger as something that patients already have, and just need to take one more step to activate. Endowment: Give patients the impression they already have the account, so they value it more. Decision staging: Break down the process into multiple stages - "having" an account and "activating" that account- and giving the impression that they are almost there because the first stage is complete

Who may qualify

Ages: 18 to 88 years
Sex: All
Healthy volunteers: Not accepted
Age groups: Adult, Older adult
Study population: The population consists of Geisinger patients whose myGeisinger status is "Pending" and who have an email address on file.

Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)

Geisinger patients whose myGeisinger status is "Pending", meaning an activation code has been generated for them, but they have not completed activation

Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)

Patients without email addresses on file
Patients who received emails from this monthly myGeisinger marketing campaign within the last 2 months

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
Less-is-betterEmail	Behavioural	Focused on medical information access, Focused on provider communication, Focused on scheduling
Social proofEmail	Behavioural	Social proof
Endowment / decision stagingEmail	Behavioural	Endowment / decision staging
Standard emailEmail	Behavioural	Control

Primary outcome

Email Opened: Control vs. Less-is-better vs. Social Proof vs. Endowment
Time frame: 8-10 days post-intervention
Whether email was opened (yes / no)
Link Clicked: Control vs. Less-is-better vs. Social Proof vs. Endowment
Time frame: 8-10 days post-intervention
Whether the link / button to start the activation process was clicked (yes / no)
Enrollment: Control vs. Less-is-better vs. Social Proof vs. Endowment
Time frame: 8-10 days post-intervention
Whether the patient enrolled in myGeisinger (yes / no)

9 secondary outcomes

Email Opened: Control vs. Less-is-better vs. Social Proof vs. Endowment
Time frame: 32-35 days post-intervention
Link Clicked: Control vs. Less-is-better vs. Social Proof vs. Endowment
Time frame: 32-35 days post-intervention
Enrollment: Control vs. Less-is-better vs. Social Proof vs. Endowment
Time frame: 32-35 days post-intervention
Email Opened: Within Less-is-better (Provider Communication vs. Managing Appointments vs. Medical Information Access)
Time frame: 8-10 days post-intervention
Link Clicked: Within Less-is-better (Provider Communication vs. Managing Appointments vs. Medical Information Access)
Time frame: 8-10 days post-intervention
Enrollment: Within Less-is-better (Provider Communication vs. Managing Appointments vs. Medical Information Access)
Time frame: 8-10 days post-intervention
Email Opened: Within Less-is-better (Provider Communication vs. Managing Appointments vs. Medical Information Access)
Time frame: 32-35 days post-intervention
Link Clicked: Within Less-is-better (Provider Communication vs. Managing Appointments vs. Medical Information Access)
Time frame: 32-35 days post-intervention
Enrollment: Within Less-is-better (Provider Communication vs. Managing Appointments vs. Medical Information Access)
Time frame: 32-35 days post-intervention

Results and safety

Results posted to the registry on 3 May 2021, as reported by the sponsor. Figures are copied from the record, not re-analysed. Full results on ClinicalTrials.gov.

Participant flow

Group	Started	Completed
Control	2,350	2,117
Focused on Provider Communication	2,350	2,129
Focused on Scheduling	2,350	2,124
Focused on Medical Information Access	2,350	2,131
Social Proof	2,350	2,127
Endowment / Decision Staging	2,349	2,115

Primary outcome: Email Opened: Control vs. Less-is-better vs. Social Proof vs. Endowment

Time frame: 8-10 days post-intervention. Count of participants. Unit: Participants

Measure	Control n = 2117	Less-is-better n = 6384	Social Proof n = 2127	Endowment / Decision Staging n = 2115
Value	558	1528	375	488

Control vs Less-is-better: Odds Ratio (OR): 0.8791371 (95% CI 0.7856042 to 0.9838058), p = 0.0248, Regression, Logistic
Control vs Social Proof: Odds Ratio (OR): 0.5980109 (95% CI 0.5159511 to 0.6931219), p <0.0001, Regression, Logistic
Control vs Endowment / Decision Staging: Odds Ratio (OR): 0.8380003 (95% CI 0.7285712 to 0.9638653), p = 0.0133, Regression, Logistic

Population analysed: Patients who were delivered an email (i.e. email did not bounce back) and for whom there was a record in the EHR 10 days post-intervention.

Primary outcome: Link Clicked: Control vs. Less-is-better vs. Social Proof vs. Endowment

Time frame: 8-10 days post-intervention. Count of participants. Unit: Participants

Measure	Control n = 558	Less-is-better n = 1528	Social Proof n = 375	Endowment / Decision Staging n = 488
Value	134	160	31	73

Control vs Less-is-better: Odds Ratio (OR): 0.3700794 (95% CI 0.2870513 to 0.4771231), p <0.0001, Regression, Logistic
Control vs Social Proof: Odds Ratio (OR): 0.2851440 (95% CI 0.1881589 to 0.4321194), p <0.0001, Regression, Logistic
Control vs Endowment / Decision Staging: Odds Ratio (OR): 0.5565905 (95% CI 0.4059477 to 0.7631354), p = 0.0003, Regression, Logistic

Population analysed: Patients who opened the intervention email and for whom there was a record in the EHR 10 days post-intervention.

Primary outcome: Enrollment: Control vs. Less-is-better vs. Social Proof vs. Endowment

Time frame: 8-10 days post-intervention. Count of participants. Unit: Participants

Measure	Control n = 558	Less-is-better n = 1528	Social Proof n = 375	Endowment / Decision Staging n = 488
Value	41	83	18	38

Control vs Less-is-better: Odds Ratio (OR): 0.72429741 (95% CI 0.49167734 to 1.0669736), p = 0.103, Regression, Logistic
Control vs Social Proof: Odds Ratio (OR): 0.63578603 (95% CI 0.35943749 to 1.1246013), p = 0.120, Regression, Logistic
Control vs Endowment / Decision Staging: Odds Ratio (OR): 1.06482385 (95% CI 0.67282661 to 1.6852036), p = 0.789, Regression, Logistic

Population analysed: Patients who opened the intervention email and for whom there was a record in the EHR 10 days post-intervention.

9 secondary outcomes are reported in the full results.

Adverse events

Time frame: No adverse events were evaluated.. Other adverse events reported at 0% frequency or more

Group	Serious adverse events	Other adverse events
Control	0 of 0	0 of 0
Focused on Provider Communication	0 of 0	0 of 0
Focused on Scheduling	0 of 0	0 of 0
Focused on Medical Information Access	0 of 0	0 of 0
Social Proof	0 of 0	0 of 0
Endowment / Decision Staging	0 of 0	0 of 0

Limitations and caveats (from the sponsor): For this study, we only received data about engagement with the email and enrollment in the patient portal. Demographic information such as age, sex, or gender were not collected. Note that for some patients, enrollment data could not be extracted from Geisinger's electronic health records; these patients were excluded from analyses. Also note that "1 week" and "1 month" outcome data were extracted within a time range that was a few days longer than 7 and 30 days post-intervention, respectively.

Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…

Research links

Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 3 May 2021.
Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. Data with no personally identifiable information will be made available to other researchers on the Open Science Framework for transparency. This will include the essential data and code needed to replicate the analysis that yielded reported findings.

Related trials for Telehealth

Recruiting
Tele-HOPE: A Telehealth Pharmacist Opioid Patient Education Pilot Study
Hematopoietic and Lymphatic System Neoplasm, Malignant Solid Neoplasm
Recruiting
Telerehabilitation Compared With Clinic-Based Physiotherapy in Children With Spastic Cerebral Palsy
Spastic Cerebral Palsy
Recruiting
Scalable TELeheaLth Cancer CARe: The STELLAR Program to Treat Cancer Risk Behaviors
Obesity, Smoking Cessation
Active, not recruiting
Enhancing Telemedicine for T2D
Type 2 Diabetes
Recruiting
The Impact of Telemedicine, Using the Caller's Mobile Phone Camera, on the Quality of Care Provided to Adult Patients Contacting the 15 Centre for Acute Dyspnea
Dyspnea

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.

Amir Goren, PhD principal investigator

Geisinger Clinic

1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

An observational study of Telehealth and Health Behavior, run by Geisinger Clinic 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 1 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 3 May 2021. 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?

Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 3 May 2021). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.

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?

Email Opened: Control vs. Less-is-better vs. Social Proof vs. Endowment (time frame: 8-10 days post-intervention). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. 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 NCT04332614.

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 3 May 2021.