Behavioral Nudges to Improve Audit and Feedback Report Opening Among Antibiotic Prescribers: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Abstract Background Peer comparison audit and feedback has demonstrated effectiveness in improving antibiotic prescribing practices, but only a minority of prescribers view their reports. We rigorously tested 3 behavioral nudging techniques delivered by email to improve report opening. Methods We co...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Open Forum Infectious Diseases 2022-05, Vol.9 (5), p.ofac111-ofac111
Hauptverfasser: Daneman, Nick, Lee, Samantha, Bai, Heming, Bell, Chaim M, Bronskill, Susan E, Campitelli, Michael A, Dobell, Gail, Fu, Longdi, Garber, Gary, Ivers, Noah, Kumar, Matthew, Lam, Jonathan M C, Langford, Bradley, Laur, Celia, Morris, Andrew M, Mulhall, Cara L, Pinto, Ruxandra, Saxena, Farah E, Schwartz, Kevin L, Brown, Kevin A
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page ofac111
container_issue 5
container_start_page ofac111
container_title Open Forum Infectious Diseases
container_volume 9
creator Daneman, Nick
Lee, Samantha
Bai, Heming
Bell, Chaim M
Bronskill, Susan E
Campitelli, Michael A
Dobell, Gail
Fu, Longdi
Garber, Gary
Ivers, Noah
Kumar, Matthew
Lam, Jonathan M C
Langford, Bradley
Laur, Celia
Morris, Andrew M
Mulhall, Cara L
Pinto, Ruxandra
Saxena, Farah E
Schwartz, Kevin L
Brown, Kevin A
description Abstract Background Peer comparison audit and feedback has demonstrated effectiveness in improving antibiotic prescribing practices, but only a minority of prescribers view their reports. We rigorously tested 3 behavioral nudging techniques delivered by email to improve report opening. Methods We conducted a pragmatic randomized controlled trial among Ontario long-term care prescribers enrolled in an ongoing peer comparison audit and feedback program which includes data on their antibiotic prescribing patterns. Physicians were randomized to 1 of 8 possible sequences of intervention/control allocation to 3 different behavioral email nudges: a social peer comparison nudge (January 2020), a maintenance of professional certification incentive nudge (October 2020), and a prior participation nudge (January 2021). The primary outcome was feedback report opening; the primary analysis pooled the effects of all 3 nudging interventions. Results The trial included 421 physicians caring for >28 000 residents at 450 facilities. In the pooled analysis, physicians opened only 29.6% of intervention and 23.9% of control reports (odds ratio [OR], 1.51 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.10–2.07], P = .011); this difference remained significant after accounting for physician characteristics and clustering (adjusted OR [aOR], 1.74 [95% CI, 1.24–2.45], P = .0014). Of individual nudging techniques, the prior participation nudge was associated with a significant increase in report opening (OR, 1.62 [95% CI, 1.06–2.47], P = .026; aOR, 2.16 [95% CI, 1.33–3.50], P = .0018). In the pooled analysis, nudges were also associated with accessing more report pages (aOR, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.14–1.43], P 28 000 long-term care residents at 450 facilities, the use of enhanced email nudging strategies was associated with modest improvements in opening of antibiotic audit and feedback reports.
doi_str_mv 10.1093/ofid/ofac111
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8982784</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A775974852</galeid><oup_id>10.1093/ofid/ofac111</oup_id><sourcerecordid>A775974852</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c483t-6665413af34b736e8124799fb3f4e3d7d02193e3a75fabd082105352647e652d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU1v1DAQhi0EolXpjTPyDQ5s8VdihwNSWNEPqaKoKmfLsSdbgxMHO1mJ_nq82qUqF2RpPLKfeT3jF6HXlJxR0vAPsfeuBGMppc_QMeNMrVRTyedP8iN0mvMPQgilpCKyeYmOeMUbJmp6jB4-w73Z-phMwF8Xt4GM54ivhinFLeB2cX7GZnT4HMB1xv7EtzDFNOObCUY_bnA7xF0cZ9_5OHuLvyXINvkOUv6IW3xbiuPgH8DhdRznFEMo6V3yJrxCL3oTMpwe9hP0_fzL3fpydX1zcbVur1dWKD6v6rquBOWm56KTvAZFmZBN03e8F8CddITRhgM3supN54hiZUxesVpIqCvm-An6tNedlm4AZ6G0YYKekh9M-q2j8frfm9Hf603catUoJpUoAu8OAin-WiDPevDZQghmhLhkXZ5S5aMFkQU926MbE0D7sY9F0ZblYPA2jtD7ct5KWTVSqIqVgvf7Aptizgn6x74o0TuL9c5ifbC44G-ezvII_zW0AG_3QFym_0v9AfTdsW4</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2648895407</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Behavioral Nudges to Improve Audit and Feedback Report Opening Among Antibiotic Prescribers: A Randomized Controlled Trial</title><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Access via Oxford University Press (Open Access Collection)</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Daneman, Nick ; Lee, Samantha ; Bai, Heming ; Bell, Chaim M ; Bronskill, Susan E ; Campitelli, Michael A ; Dobell, Gail ; Fu, Longdi ; Garber, Gary ; Ivers, Noah ; Kumar, Matthew ; Lam, Jonathan M C ; Langford, Bradley ; Laur, Celia ; Morris, Andrew M ; Mulhall, Cara L ; Pinto, Ruxandra ; Saxena, Farah E ; Schwartz, Kevin L ; Brown, Kevin A</creator><creatorcontrib>Daneman, Nick ; Lee, Samantha ; Bai, Heming ; Bell, Chaim M ; Bronskill, Susan E ; Campitelli, Michael A ; Dobell, Gail ; Fu, Longdi ; Garber, Gary ; Ivers, Noah ; Kumar, Matthew ; Lam, Jonathan M C ; Langford, Bradley ; Laur, Celia ; Morris, Andrew M ; Mulhall, Cara L ; Pinto, Ruxandra ; Saxena, Farah E ; Schwartz, Kevin L ; Brown, Kevin A</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Background Peer comparison audit and feedback has demonstrated effectiveness in improving antibiotic prescribing practices, but only a minority of prescribers view their reports. We rigorously tested 3 behavioral nudging techniques delivered by email to improve report opening. Methods We conducted a pragmatic randomized controlled trial among Ontario long-term care prescribers enrolled in an ongoing peer comparison audit and feedback program which includes data on their antibiotic prescribing patterns. Physicians were randomized to 1 of 8 possible sequences of intervention/control allocation to 3 different behavioral email nudges: a social peer comparison nudge (January 2020), a maintenance of professional certification incentive nudge (October 2020), and a prior participation nudge (January 2021). The primary outcome was feedback report opening; the primary analysis pooled the effects of all 3 nudging interventions. Results The trial included 421 physicians caring for &gt;28 000 residents at 450 facilities. In the pooled analysis, physicians opened only 29.6% of intervention and 23.9% of control reports (odds ratio [OR], 1.51 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.10–2.07], P = .011); this difference remained significant after accounting for physician characteristics and clustering (adjusted OR [aOR], 1.74 [95% CI, 1.24–2.45], P = .0014). Of individual nudging techniques, the prior participation nudge was associated with a significant increase in report opening (OR, 1.62 [95% CI, 1.06–2.47], P = .026; aOR, 2.16 [95% CI, 1.33–3.50], P = .0018). In the pooled analysis, nudges were also associated with accessing more report pages (aOR, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.14–1.43], P &lt; .001). Conclusions Enhanced nudging strategies modestly improved report opening, but more work is needed to optimize physician engagement with audit and feedback. Clinical Trials Registration NCT04187742. In this randomized controlled trial of 421 physicians caring for &gt;28 000 long-term care residents at 450 facilities, the use of enhanced email nudging strategies was associated with modest improvements in opening of antibiotic audit and feedback reports.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2328-8957</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2328-8957</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/ofid/ofac111</identifier><identifier>PMID: 35392461</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>US: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Analysis ; Antibiotics ; Clinical trials ; Long-term care of the sick ; Major ; Prescription writing</subject><ispartof>Open Forum Infectious Diseases, 2022-05, Vol.9 (5), p.ofac111-ofac111</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. 2022</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America.</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2022 Oxford University Press</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c483t-6665413af34b736e8124799fb3f4e3d7d02193e3a75fabd082105352647e652d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c483t-6665413af34b736e8124799fb3f4e3d7d02193e3a75fabd082105352647e652d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8982784/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8982784/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,864,885,1604,27924,27925,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35392461$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Daneman, Nick</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, Samantha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bai, Heming</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bell, Chaim M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bronskill, Susan E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Campitelli, Michael A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dobell, Gail</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fu, Longdi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Garber, Gary</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ivers, Noah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kumar, Matthew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lam, Jonathan M C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Langford, Bradley</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Laur, Celia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Morris, Andrew M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mulhall, Cara L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pinto, Ruxandra</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saxena, Farah E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schwartz, Kevin L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brown, Kevin A</creatorcontrib><title>Behavioral Nudges to Improve Audit and Feedback Report Opening Among Antibiotic Prescribers: A Randomized Controlled Trial</title><title>Open Forum Infectious Diseases</title><addtitle>Open Forum Infect Dis</addtitle><description>Abstract Background Peer comparison audit and feedback has demonstrated effectiveness in improving antibiotic prescribing practices, but only a minority of prescribers view their reports. We rigorously tested 3 behavioral nudging techniques delivered by email to improve report opening. Methods We conducted a pragmatic randomized controlled trial among Ontario long-term care prescribers enrolled in an ongoing peer comparison audit and feedback program which includes data on their antibiotic prescribing patterns. Physicians were randomized to 1 of 8 possible sequences of intervention/control allocation to 3 different behavioral email nudges: a social peer comparison nudge (January 2020), a maintenance of professional certification incentive nudge (October 2020), and a prior participation nudge (January 2021). The primary outcome was feedback report opening; the primary analysis pooled the effects of all 3 nudging interventions. Results The trial included 421 physicians caring for &gt;28 000 residents at 450 facilities. In the pooled analysis, physicians opened only 29.6% of intervention and 23.9% of control reports (odds ratio [OR], 1.51 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.10–2.07], P = .011); this difference remained significant after accounting for physician characteristics and clustering (adjusted OR [aOR], 1.74 [95% CI, 1.24–2.45], P = .0014). Of individual nudging techniques, the prior participation nudge was associated with a significant increase in report opening (OR, 1.62 [95% CI, 1.06–2.47], P = .026; aOR, 2.16 [95% CI, 1.33–3.50], P = .0018). In the pooled analysis, nudges were also associated with accessing more report pages (aOR, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.14–1.43], P &lt; .001). Conclusions Enhanced nudging strategies modestly improved report opening, but more work is needed to optimize physician engagement with audit and feedback. Clinical Trials Registration NCT04187742. In this randomized controlled trial of 421 physicians caring for &gt;28 000 long-term care residents at 450 facilities, the use of enhanced email nudging strategies was associated with modest improvements in opening of antibiotic audit and feedback reports.</description><subject>Analysis</subject><subject>Antibiotics</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>Long-term care of the sick</subject><subject>Major</subject><subject>Prescription writing</subject><issn>2328-8957</issn><issn>2328-8957</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>TOX</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kU1v1DAQhi0EolXpjTPyDQ5s8VdihwNSWNEPqaKoKmfLsSdbgxMHO1mJ_nq82qUqF2RpPLKfeT3jF6HXlJxR0vAPsfeuBGMppc_QMeNMrVRTyedP8iN0mvMPQgilpCKyeYmOeMUbJmp6jB4-w73Z-phMwF8Xt4GM54ivhinFLeB2cX7GZnT4HMB1xv7EtzDFNOObCUY_bnA7xF0cZ9_5OHuLvyXINvkOUv6IW3xbiuPgH8DhdRznFEMo6V3yJrxCL3oTMpwe9hP0_fzL3fpydX1zcbVur1dWKD6v6rquBOWm56KTvAZFmZBN03e8F8CddITRhgM3supN54hiZUxesVpIqCvm-An6tNedlm4AZ6G0YYKekh9M-q2j8frfm9Hf603catUoJpUoAu8OAin-WiDPevDZQghmhLhkXZ5S5aMFkQU926MbE0D7sY9F0ZblYPA2jtD7ct5KWTVSqIqVgvf7Aptizgn6x74o0TuL9c5ifbC44G-ezvII_zW0AG_3QFym_0v9AfTdsW4</recordid><startdate>20220501</startdate><enddate>20220501</enddate><creator>Daneman, Nick</creator><creator>Lee, Samantha</creator><creator>Bai, Heming</creator><creator>Bell, Chaim M</creator><creator>Bronskill, Susan E</creator><creator>Campitelli, Michael A</creator><creator>Dobell, Gail</creator><creator>Fu, Longdi</creator><creator>Garber, Gary</creator><creator>Ivers, Noah</creator><creator>Kumar, Matthew</creator><creator>Lam, Jonathan M C</creator><creator>Langford, Bradley</creator><creator>Laur, Celia</creator><creator>Morris, Andrew M</creator><creator>Mulhall, Cara L</creator><creator>Pinto, Ruxandra</creator><creator>Saxena, Farah E</creator><creator>Schwartz, Kevin L</creator><creator>Brown, Kevin A</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>TOX</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>IAO</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20220501</creationdate><title>Behavioral Nudges to Improve Audit and Feedback Report Opening Among Antibiotic Prescribers: A Randomized Controlled Trial</title><author>Daneman, Nick ; Lee, Samantha ; Bai, Heming ; Bell, Chaim M ; Bronskill, Susan E ; Campitelli, Michael A ; Dobell, Gail ; Fu, Longdi ; Garber, Gary ; Ivers, Noah ; Kumar, Matthew ; Lam, Jonathan M C ; Langford, Bradley ; Laur, Celia ; Morris, Andrew M ; Mulhall, Cara L ; Pinto, Ruxandra ; Saxena, Farah E ; Schwartz, Kevin L ; Brown, Kevin A</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c483t-6665413af34b736e8124799fb3f4e3d7d02193e3a75fabd082105352647e652d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Analysis</topic><topic>Antibiotics</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>Long-term care of the sick</topic><topic>Major</topic><topic>Prescription writing</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Daneman, Nick</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, Samantha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bai, Heming</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bell, Chaim M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bronskill, Susan E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Campitelli, Michael A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dobell, Gail</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fu, Longdi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Garber, Gary</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ivers, Noah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kumar, Matthew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lam, Jonathan M C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Langford, Bradley</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Laur, Celia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Morris, Andrew M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mulhall, Cara L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pinto, Ruxandra</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saxena, Farah E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schwartz, Kevin L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brown, Kevin A</creatorcontrib><collection>Access via Oxford University Press (Open Access Collection)</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale Academic OneFile</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Open Forum Infectious Diseases</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Daneman, Nick</au><au>Lee, Samantha</au><au>Bai, Heming</au><au>Bell, Chaim M</au><au>Bronskill, Susan E</au><au>Campitelli, Michael A</au><au>Dobell, Gail</au><au>Fu, Longdi</au><au>Garber, Gary</au><au>Ivers, Noah</au><au>Kumar, Matthew</au><au>Lam, Jonathan M C</au><au>Langford, Bradley</au><au>Laur, Celia</au><au>Morris, Andrew M</au><au>Mulhall, Cara L</au><au>Pinto, Ruxandra</au><au>Saxena, Farah E</au><au>Schwartz, Kevin L</au><au>Brown, Kevin A</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Behavioral Nudges to Improve Audit and Feedback Report Opening Among Antibiotic Prescribers: A Randomized Controlled Trial</atitle><jtitle>Open Forum Infectious Diseases</jtitle><addtitle>Open Forum Infect Dis</addtitle><date>2022-05-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>9</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>ofac111</spage><epage>ofac111</epage><pages>ofac111-ofac111</pages><issn>2328-8957</issn><eissn>2328-8957</eissn><abstract>Abstract Background Peer comparison audit and feedback has demonstrated effectiveness in improving antibiotic prescribing practices, but only a minority of prescribers view their reports. We rigorously tested 3 behavioral nudging techniques delivered by email to improve report opening. Methods We conducted a pragmatic randomized controlled trial among Ontario long-term care prescribers enrolled in an ongoing peer comparison audit and feedback program which includes data on their antibiotic prescribing patterns. Physicians were randomized to 1 of 8 possible sequences of intervention/control allocation to 3 different behavioral email nudges: a social peer comparison nudge (January 2020), a maintenance of professional certification incentive nudge (October 2020), and a prior participation nudge (January 2021). The primary outcome was feedback report opening; the primary analysis pooled the effects of all 3 nudging interventions. Results The trial included 421 physicians caring for &gt;28 000 residents at 450 facilities. In the pooled analysis, physicians opened only 29.6% of intervention and 23.9% of control reports (odds ratio [OR], 1.51 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.10–2.07], P = .011); this difference remained significant after accounting for physician characteristics and clustering (adjusted OR [aOR], 1.74 [95% CI, 1.24–2.45], P = .0014). Of individual nudging techniques, the prior participation nudge was associated with a significant increase in report opening (OR, 1.62 [95% CI, 1.06–2.47], P = .026; aOR, 2.16 [95% CI, 1.33–3.50], P = .0018). In the pooled analysis, nudges were also associated with accessing more report pages (aOR, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.14–1.43], P &lt; .001). Conclusions Enhanced nudging strategies modestly improved report opening, but more work is needed to optimize physician engagement with audit and feedback. Clinical Trials Registration NCT04187742. In this randomized controlled trial of 421 physicians caring for &gt;28 000 long-term care residents at 450 facilities, the use of enhanced email nudging strategies was associated with modest improvements in opening of antibiotic audit and feedback reports.</abstract><cop>US</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><pmid>35392461</pmid><doi>10.1093/ofid/ofac111</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2328-8957
ispartof Open Forum Infectious Diseases, 2022-05, Vol.9 (5), p.ofac111-ofac111
issn 2328-8957
2328-8957
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8982784
source DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Access via Oxford University Press (Open Access Collection); Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central
subjects Analysis
Antibiotics
Clinical trials
Long-term care of the sick
Major
Prescription writing
title Behavioral Nudges to Improve Audit and Feedback Report Opening Among Antibiotic Prescribers: A Randomized Controlled Trial
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-19T01%3A11%3A25IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Behavioral%20Nudges%20to%20Improve%20Audit%20and%20Feedback%20Report%20Opening%20Among%20Antibiotic%20Prescribers:%20A%20Randomized%20Controlled%20Trial&rft.jtitle=Open%20Forum%20Infectious%20Diseases&rft.au=Daneman,%20Nick&rft.date=2022-05-01&rft.volume=9&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=ofac111&rft.epage=ofac111&rft.pages=ofac111-ofac111&rft.issn=2328-8957&rft.eissn=2328-8957&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/ofid/ofac111&rft_dat=%3Cgale_pubme%3EA775974852%3C/gale_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2648895407&rft_id=info:pmid/35392461&rft_galeid=A775974852&rft_oup_id=10.1093/ofid/ofac111&rfr_iscdi=true