Lung NeoplasmsNCT07682220
Default Option Nudging Intervention to Improve the Adherence Rates of Cancer Screening
A study testing Default Options in people with Lung Neoplasms and Stomach Neoplasms, run by Harbin Medical University at 1 site in China.
Trial summary
The goal of this clinical trial is to learn if a behavioral "nudge" strategy, specifically a default option, can improve screening participation in populations at high risk for lung and stomach cancer. The main questions it aims to answer are: 1. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 45 to 74 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Lung Neoplasms, Stomach Neoplasms, Early Detection of Cancer
- What is being tested?
- Default Options
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 1,200 participants
- Where
- 1 siteChina
- Study dates
- 27 Apr 2025to 1 Jun 2025
- 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 45 to 74 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- High-risk population of lung cancer or gastric cancer.
- Lung cancer high-risk definition (based on the 2024 Lung Cancer Screening and Early Diagnosis and Treatment Program organized by the National Health Commission of the PRC): Age ≥50 years and pack-years of smoking ≥20, including former smoking ≥20 pack-years, but smoking cessation less than 15 years (Note: Pack-years of smoking = number of packs smoked per day × number of years smoked).
- Gastric cancer high-risk definition (based on the 2024 Gastric Cancer Screening and Early Diagnosis and Treatment Program organized by the National Health Commission of the PRC): Age ≥45 years old and living in areas with a high incidence of gastric cancer (Liaoning, Fujian, Gansu, Shandong, Jiangsu).
- Ability to read and comprehend simplified Chinese.
- The informed consent statement was read and confirmed.
Who cannot join
- Reading impairment preventing independent questionnaire completion.
- Failure to pass attention checks and logical consistency tests embedded within the questionnaire.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Default Option Nudging Intervention to Improve the Adherence Rates of Cancer Screening in High-risk Population: Randomized Controlled Trial and Intervention Disclosure Analysis
The goal of this clinical trial is to learn if a behavioral "nudge" strategy, specifically a default option, can improve screening participation in populations at high risk for lung and stomach cancer. The main questions it aims to answer are:
- Does presenting a screening appointment as a default option increase the likelihood that high-risk individuals will choose to be screened?
- How do participants react, and what is their level of acceptance, when the nudge intervention is disclosed to them?
- Does this transparency (disclosing the nudge) change their subsequent screening decisions? Researchers will compare a default option group to a standard control group to see if the nudge effectively increases screening adherence.
Read more
Participants will:
- Read a short educational text about lung or stomach cancer and its screening.
- Complete an online questionnaire.
- Make a decision regarding a simulated cancer screening appointment.
- Read a disclosure explaining the behavioral nudge strategy used during the study.
- Re-evaluate their screening decision and answer questions regarding their attitude toward the nudge.
- Being tested
- Default Options
- Keywords
- Behavioral Economics, Nudge, Default Option, Screening Adherence, Disclosure Effect, Cancer Screening
- Medical subject headings
- Lung Neoplasms, Stomach Neoplasms, Patient Compliance
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Default OptionsBehavioural
Participants in this arm are subjected to a behavioral "nudge" using a default option mechanism during a simulated online appointment process for cancer screening. Instead of being asked to actively schedule an appointment (an opt-in approach), the screening appointment is presented to them as pre-selected or pre-scheduled (an opt-out approach). Furthermore, to evaluate the ethical and behavioral impact of transparency, this intervention uniquely includes a "disclosure" phase: after the initial decision, participants are explicitly informed about the nudge strategy that was just applied to them, and their screening intention is immediately re-measured.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| control group (lung cancer screening) | No intervention | Control group participants received neutral, informational content about lung cancer and screening. This content included lung cancer's status as a leading cause of cancer mortality, the challenges of late-stage diagnosis, and LDCT as the gold standard screening method. Participants were informed that high-risk individuals, particularly long-term smokers, require annual screening due to elevated cancer risk, with each participant explicitly told they qualified as high-risk due to their smoking history. Meanwhile, CanSPUC and its purpose were also shown to the participants. The screening participation question for controls was framed as: "We provide available time slots for free lung cancer screening. You can directly view available appointment times and make reservations according to your preference. Would you like to schedule lung cancer screening?" |
| intervention group (lung cancer screening) | Experimental | Intervention participants received the same neutral information plus a default option nudge. The critical modification involved reframing the screening participation measure as: "We have already scheduled a free lung cancer screening appointment for you, which you can attend at your convenience. If you do not wish to participate, please indicate below." We also default to "Yes, I would like to make an appointment for lung cancer screening and see the available hours for lung cancer screening" for this question. Receives: Behavioral: Default Options |
| control group (gastric cancer screening) | No intervention | Control group participants received neutral, informational content about gastric cancer and screening. This content included gastric cancer's status as a cause of cancer mortality, the challenges of late-stage diagnosis, and endoscope as the gold standard screening method. Participants were informed that high-risk individuals require screening per 5 years, with each participant explicitly told they qualified as high-risk due to their living regions. Meanwhile, CanSPUC and its purpose were also shown to the participants. The screening participation question for controls was framed as: "We provide available time slots for free gastric cancer screening. You can directly view available appointment times and make reservations according to your preference. Would you like to schedule gastric cancer screening?" |
| intervention group (gastric cancer screening) | Experimental | Intervention participants received the same neutral information plus a default option nudge. The critical modification involved reframing the screening participation measure as: "We have already scheduled a free gastric cancer screening appointment for you, which you can attend at your convenience. If you do not wish to participate, please indicate below." We also default to "Yes, I would like to make an appointment for gastric cancer screening and see the available hours for lung cancer screening" for this question. Receives: Behavioral: Default Options |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Percentage of Participants Who Accept the Cancer Screening Appointment
This outcome is assessed via a dichotomous choice (Yes/No) embedded in the simulated online scheduling system within the questionnaire. The value reported will be the percentage of participants who choose to accept and schedule the screening appointment.
Measured: Immediately after the default option intervention
Secondary outcomes (4)
Participant Attitude Score Towards the Default Option Nudge
This measure is assessed via a self-reported questionnaire using a Likert scale. Scores range from 1 to 5, where 1 indicates a very negative attitude and 5 indicates a very positive attitude. Higher scores represent a better attitude towards the nudge strategy.
Measured: Immediately after the disclosure of the intervention
Self-Reported Score of the Nudge's Influence on Decision-Making
This measure is assessed via a self-reported questionnaire using a Likert scale. Scores range from 1 to 5, where 1 indicates no influence and 5 indicates extreme influence. Higher scores indicate that the participant felt the default option had a greater influence on their appointment decision.
Measured: Immediately after the disclosure of the intervention
Acceptance Score of the Default Option Nudge in Public Health Services
This measure is assessed via a self-reported questionnaire using a Likert scale. Scores range from 1 to 5, where 1 indicates completely unacceptable and 5 indicates completely acceptable. Higher scores indicate higher social acceptance and suitability of using such behavioral nudges in public health promotion.
Measured: Immediately after the disclosure of the intervention
Percentage of Participants Who Accept the Appointment After Disclosure
This outcome is assessed via a secondary dichotomous choice (Yes/No) presented after the participant reads the disclosure statement explaining the nudge. The value reported is the percentage of participants who choose to accept the screening at this final stage.
Measured: Immediately after the disclosure of the intervention
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted2 Jul 2026
- Study start27 Apr 2025
- Primary completion1 Jun 2025
- Study completion1 Jun 2025
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Lung NeoplasmsStudies 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
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Investigator
- Enrolment
- 1,200 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Harbin Medical University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Zhisheng Zheng, Harbin Medical University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07682220
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- HMUIRB2025029PRE
- Status last verified
- Jun 2026
- First submitted
- 23 Jun 2026
- Last updated
- 2 Jul 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: All collected de-identified individual participant data (IPD) that underlie the results reported in the final publication. This includes demographic characteristics, group allocation, behavioral screening decisions, and responses related to attitudes toward the disclosure intervention.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 2 Jul 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Default Option Nudging Intervention to Improve the Adherence Rates of Cancer Screening in High-risk Population: Randomized Controlled Trial and Intervention Disclosure Analysis
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07682220
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- HMUIRB2025029PRE
- Keywords
- Behavioral Economics, Nudge, Default Option, Screening Adherence, Disclosure Effect, Cancer Screening
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 1,200 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Harbin Medical UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 27 Apr 2025 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Jun 2025 (actual)
- Study completion
- 1 Jun 2025 (actual)
- First posted
- 2 Jul 2026 (actual)
- 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.
The goal of this clinical trial is to learn if a behavioral "nudge" strategy, specifically a default option, can improve screening participation in populations at high risk for lung and stomach cancer. The main questions it aims to answer are:
- Does presenting a screening appointment as a default option increase the likelihood that high-risk individuals will choose to be screened?
- How do participants react, and what is their level of acceptance, when the nudge intervention is disclosed to them?
- Does this transparency (disclosing the nudge) change their subsequent screening decisions? Researchers will compare a default option group to a standard control group to see if the nudge effectively increases screening adherence.
Participants will:
- Read a short educational text about lung or stomach cancer and its screening.
- Complete an online questionnaire.
- Make a decision regarding a simulated cancer screening appointment.
- Read a disclosure explaining the behavioral nudge strategy used during the study.
- Re-evaluate their screening decision and answer questions regarding their attitude toward the nudge.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, investigator)
- Number of arms
- 4
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| control group (lung cancer screening) | No intervention | –Control group participants received neutral, informational content about lung cancer and screening. This content included lung cancer's status as a leading cause of cancer mortality, the challenges of late-stage diagnosis, and LDCT as the gold standard screening method. Participants were informed that high-risk individuals, particularly long-term smokers, require annual screening due to elevated cancer risk, with each participant explicitly told they qualified as high-risk due to their smoking history. Meanwhile, CanSPUC and its purpose were also shown to the participants. The screening participation question for controls was framed as: "We provide available time slots for free lung cancer screening. You can directly view available appointment times and make reservations according to your preference. Would you like to schedule lung cancer screening?" |
| intervention group (lung cancer screening) | Experimental | Behavioral: Default OptionsIntervention participants received the same neutral information plus a default option nudge. The critical modification involved reframing the screening participation measure as: "We have already scheduled a free lung cancer screening appointment for you, which you can attend at your convenience. If you do not wish to participate, please indicate below." We also default to "Yes, I would like to make an appointment for lung cancer screening and see the available hours for lung cancer screening" for this question. |
| control group (gastric cancer screening) | No intervention | –Control group participants received neutral, informational content about gastric cancer and screening. This content included gastric cancer's status as a cause of cancer mortality, the challenges of late-stage diagnosis, and endoscope as the gold standard screening method. Participants were informed that high-risk individuals require screening per 5 years, with each participant explicitly told they qualified as high-risk due to their living regions. Meanwhile, CanSPUC and its purpose were also shown to the participants. The screening participation question for controls was framed as: "We provide available time slots for free gastric cancer screening. You can directly view available appointment times and make reservations according to your preference. Would you like to schedule gastric cancer screening?" |
| intervention group (gastric cancer screening) | Experimental | Behavioral: Default OptionsIntervention participants received the same neutral information plus a default option nudge. The critical modification involved reframing the screening participation measure as: "We have already scheduled a free gastric cancer screening appointment for you, which you can attend at your convenience. If you do not wish to participate, please indicate below." We also default to "Yes, I would like to make an appointment for gastric cancer screening and see the available hours for lung cancer screening" for this question. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 45 to 74 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- High-risk population of lung cancer or gastric cancer.
- Lung cancer high-risk definition (based on the 2024 Lung Cancer Screening and Early Diagnosis and Treatment Program organized by the National Health Commission of the PRC): Age ≥50 years and pack-years of smoking ≥20, including former smoking ≥20 pack-years, but smoking cessation less than 15 years (Note: Pack-years of smoking = number of packs smoked per day × number of years smoked).
- Gastric cancer high-risk definition (based on the 2024 Gastric Cancer Screening and Early Diagnosis and Treatment Program organized by the National Health Commission of the PRC): Age ≥45 years old and living in areas with a high incidence of gastric cancer (Liaoning, Fujian, Gansu, Shandong, Jiangsu).
- Ability to read and comprehend simplified Chinese.
- The informed consent statement was read and confirmed.
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Reading impairment preventing independent questionnaire completion.
- Failure to pass attention checks and logical consistency tests embedded within the questionnaire.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Default OptionsParticipants in this arm are subjected to a behavioral "nudge" using a default option mechanism during a simulated online appointment process for cancer screening. Instead of being asked to actively schedule an appointment (an opt-in approach), the screening appointment is presented to them as pre-selected or pre-scheduled (an opt-out approach). Furthermore, to evaluate the ethical and behavioral impact of transparency, this intervention uniquely includes a "disclosure" phase: after the initial decision, participants are explicitly informed about the nudge strategy that was just applied to them, and their screening intention is immediately re-measured. | Behavioural | intervention group (gastric cancer screening), intervention group (lung cancer screening) |
Primary outcome
Percentage of Participants Who Accept the Cancer Screening Appointment
Time frame: Immediately after the default option intervention
This outcome is assessed via a dichotomous choice (Yes/No) embedded in the simulated online scheduling system within the questionnaire. The value reported will be the percentage of participants who choose to accept and schedule the screening appointment.
4 secondary outcomes
Participant Attitude Score Towards the Default Option Nudge
Time frame: Immediately after the disclosure of the intervention
Self-Reported Score of the Nudge's Influence on Decision-Making
Time frame: Immediately after the disclosure of the intervention
Acceptance Score of the Default Option Nudge in Public Health Services
Time frame: Immediately after the disclosure of the intervention
Percentage of Participants Who Accept the Appointment After Disclosure
Time frame: Immediately after the disclosure of the intervention
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 2 Jul 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. All collected de-identified individual participant data (IPD) that underlie the results reported in the final publication. This includes demographic characteristics, group allocation, behavioral screening decisions, and responses related to attitudes toward the disclosure intervention.
Related trials for Lung Neoplasms
RecruitingPhase 3
A Study Comparing TAK-928 With Docetaxel in Adults With Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
IO Resistant Squamous and Nonsquamous NSCLC
RecruitingPhase 3
MK-3475A±Calderasib (MK-1084) in Completely Resected Stage IIA-IIIB (N2) KRAS G12Cm NSCLC (MK-1084-013)
Non-small Cell Lung Cancer
RecruitingPhase 2
A Study of Navlimetostat (BMS-986504) Monotherapy and in Combination With Other Agents in Participants With Advanced and/or Metastatic Solid Tumors With Homozygous MTAP Deletion (MountainTAP-5)
Solid Tumors
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
A Phase 1 Trial of KAN-001 With Pembrolizumab, With or Without Chemotherapy, in Participants With PD-L1-Positive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Active, not recruitingPhase 1/2
RNA Lipid Particles Targeting Pediatric Recurrent Intracranial Malignancies and Other systEmic Solid Tumors
Recurrent Pulmonary Osteosarcoma, Recurrent High-grade Glioma
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.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Default Options in people with Lung Neoplasms and Stomach Neoplasms, run by Harbin Medical University at 1 site in China.
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 5 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 2 Jul 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 China. 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?
Percentage of Participants Who Accept the Cancer Screening Appointment (time frame: Immediately after the default option intervention). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
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 2 Jul 2026.