Shifting medical guidelines: compliance and spillover effects for revised antibiotic recommendations
Shifting medical guidelines: compliance and spillover effects for revised antibiotic recommendations
Rationale
Experts have recently argued that guidelines to take the full course of antibiotics are due for revision, instead recommending that patients stop when they feel better. It is unknown how communicating revised guidelines from medical experts about how long to take a course of antibiotics will affect beliefs, behavior, and trust in guidelines more generally. Objective. This study seeks to understand how revisions to long standing advice impacts the beliefs, behavior, and trust toward such guidelines from medical experts.
Method
In a pre-registered experiment, we use a national sample of UK participants (N = 1,263) to test the effects of a message that reverses the prior full-course guideline (versus a status quo message to take the full course). We also test a secondary intervention that emphasizes that medical guidance and evidence may change over time.
Results
Early stoppage messages significantly shifted personal beliefs and perceived expert consensus about early stoppage (a shift of 16%, 95% CI: 13.8% to 17.9%, p <.001) and behavioral intent (a shift of 19%, 95% CI: 15.3 to 21.8%, p < .001) in the intended direction. Yet, the new guideline also slightly decreased acceptance of uncertainty about future guidelines (a decrease of 2%, 95% CI: 0.2% to 3.1%, p = .022) and general intention to comply with other guidelines in the future (a decrease of 6%, 95% CI: 2.6% to 8.4%, p < .001); it did not affect perceptions of medical researchers’ or doctors’ credibility or respondents’ epistemic efficacy. Prior belief about early stoppage did not moderate receptivity to messages. Notably, though, we also find receptivity to early stoppage messages was contingent on deference to experts. We find no effect of a secondary intervention that emphasizes that medical guidance and evidence may change over time. Conclusions. Overall, our findings suggest the (U.K.) public is likely to accept new guidelines that change long standing advice to take a full course of antibiotics. While respondents show wariness about further future revisions, these data do not show that changing guidelines undermines trust in the experts that produce them.
112943
Lyons, Benjamin
562d35bb-6be0-4e08-8663-0cc28bfa0063
Merola, Vittorio
3a0f1d8e-ee5d-4b08-a959-8a4fbf318acf
Reifler, Jason
426301a1-f90b-470d-a076-04a9d716c491
1 June 2020
Lyons, Benjamin
562d35bb-6be0-4e08-8663-0cc28bfa0063
Merola, Vittorio
3a0f1d8e-ee5d-4b08-a959-8a4fbf318acf
Reifler, Jason
426301a1-f90b-470d-a076-04a9d716c491
Lyons, Benjamin, Merola, Vittorio and Reifler, Jason
(2020)
Shifting medical guidelines: compliance and spillover effects for revised antibiotic recommendations.
Social Science Medicine, 255, .
(doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.112943).
Abstract
Rationale
Experts have recently argued that guidelines to take the full course of antibiotics are due for revision, instead recommending that patients stop when they feel better. It is unknown how communicating revised guidelines from medical experts about how long to take a course of antibiotics will affect beliefs, behavior, and trust in guidelines more generally. Objective. This study seeks to understand how revisions to long standing advice impacts the beliefs, behavior, and trust toward such guidelines from medical experts.
Method
In a pre-registered experiment, we use a national sample of UK participants (N = 1,263) to test the effects of a message that reverses the prior full-course guideline (versus a status quo message to take the full course). We also test a secondary intervention that emphasizes that medical guidance and evidence may change over time.
Results
Early stoppage messages significantly shifted personal beliefs and perceived expert consensus about early stoppage (a shift of 16%, 95% CI: 13.8% to 17.9%, p <.001) and behavioral intent (a shift of 19%, 95% CI: 15.3 to 21.8%, p < .001) in the intended direction. Yet, the new guideline also slightly decreased acceptance of uncertainty about future guidelines (a decrease of 2%, 95% CI: 0.2% to 3.1%, p = .022) and general intention to comply with other guidelines in the future (a decrease of 6%, 95% CI: 2.6% to 8.4%, p < .001); it did not affect perceptions of medical researchers’ or doctors’ credibility or respondents’ epistemic efficacy. Prior belief about early stoppage did not moderate receptivity to messages. Notably, though, we also find receptivity to early stoppage messages was contingent on deference to experts. We find no effect of a secondary intervention that emphasizes that medical guidance and evidence may change over time. Conclusions. Overall, our findings suggest the (U.K.) public is likely to accept new guidelines that change long standing advice to take a full course of antibiotics. While respondents show wariness about further future revisions, these data do not show that changing guidelines undermines trust in the experts that produce them.
This record has no associated files available for download.
More information
Published date: 1 June 2020
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 500591
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/500591
PURE UUID: 6d04c3ac-b9b0-4db2-bfe6-9ae6d8cf8f06
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 06 May 2025 16:57
Last modified: 24 Jun 2025 02:15
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Benjamin Lyons
Author:
Vittorio Merola
Author:
Jason Reifler
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics