Menu
Not yet recruiting NCT05686889

Post-Hoc Enthusiasm and Wariness

No phase Interventional Health Behavior

For patients and families

In plain language

An automatic summary of structured registry data. It is an orientation aid, not a substitute for the official protocol or a physician assessment.

What is being studied
The protocol lists: Patient self-report.
Who it may be relevant to
Registry conditions: Health Behavior. Basic parameters: No limits · All.
What needs checking
Age, condition and sex are only basic indicators. Prior treatment, laboratory values and other mandatory requirements appear in the eligibility criteria below.
Where it takes place
Center list to be confirmed — check the primary protocol.
Next step
Save the trial, show it to the treating physician, and confirm current recruitment with the study center. Costs, documents and travel →

Overview

The post-hoc fallacy (also termed the post-hoc-ergo-propter-hoc fallacy) has been recognized for centuries with endless relevance. The general concept in medical care is that patients who improve after a treatment are not necessary patients who improve because of a treatment. Modern medicine provides multiple opportunities to examine such pitfalls of judgment due to the prevailing uncertainty, incompleteness of our understanding pathogenic mechanisms, and natural tendency to connect treatments to outcomes. In this study, we will investigate whether judgments about vitamin supplementation might demonstrate the post-hoc fallacy.

Detailed description

We plan to conduct a brief survey of pharmacies portraying a patient in two slightly different versions. One version will portray the patient who feels better after starting a vitamin supplement whereas another version will portray the patient who feels unchanged after starting a vitamin supplement. The patients will be randomly assigned to participants and otherwise contain identical information. Judgments will be measured by eliciting participants recommendation about continuing the vitamin (Appendix\_Script).

Interventions

  • Other Patient self-report
    Simulated patient following structured script

Primary outcome measures

  • Response variable in each survey is a binary recommendation whether to continue the vitamin supplement or discontinue the vitamin supplement [Time frame: Short-term (less than 5 minutes)]

Eligibility criteria

Inclusion criteria

  • Community pharmacist

Exclusion criteria

  • Outside Ontario

Criteria are shown verbatim from the registry (in English). Final eligibility is always assessed by the study center.

Healthy volunteers: Yes

Study design

Allocation
Randomized
Model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Double blind
Primary purpose
Health services research

Study locations

Center list to be confirmed — check the primary protocol.

Identifiers

NCT: NCT05686889 · 5692

Primary sources (government registries)

View this study on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗