↓ Skip to main content

The effect of introducing a financial incentive to promote application of fluoride varnish in dental practice in Scotland: a natural experiment

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
101 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The effect of introducing a financial incentive to promote application of fluoride varnish in dental practice in Scotland: a natural experiment
Published in
Implementation Science, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13012-018-0775-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wendy Gnich, Andrea Sherriff, Debbie Bonetti, David I. Conway, Lorna M. D. Macpherson

Abstract

Financial incentives are often used to influence professional practice, yet the factors which influence their effectiveness and their behavioural mechanisms are not fully understood. In keeping with clinical guidelines, Childsmile (Scotland's oral health improvement programme) advocates twice yearly fluoride varnish application (FVA) for children in dental practice. To support implementation Childsmile offered dental practitioners a fee-per-item payment for varnishing 2-5-year-olds' teeth through a pilot. In October 2011 payment was extended to all dental practitioners. This paper compares FVA pre- and post-roll-out and explores the financial incentive's behavioural mechanisms. A natural experimental approach using a longitudinal cohort of dental practitioners (n = 1090) compared FVA pre- (time 1) and post- (time 2) financial incentive. Responses from practitioners who did not work in a Childsmile pilot practice when considering their 2-5-year-old patients (novel incentive group) were compared with all other responses (continuous incentive group). The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) was used to measure change in behavioural mechanisms associated with the incentive. Analysis of covariance was used to investigate FVA rates and associated behavioural mechanisms in the two groups. At time 2, 709 74%, of eligible responders, were followed up. In general, FVA rates increased over time for both groups; however, the novel incentive group experienced a greater increase (β [95% CI] = 0.82 [0.72 to 0.92]) than the continuous incentive group. Despite this, only 33% of practitioners reported 'always' varnishing increased risk 2-5-year-olds' teeth following introduction of the financial incentive, 19% for standard risk children. Domain scores at time 2 (adjusting for time 1) increased more for the novel incentive group (compared to the continuous incentive group) for five domains: knowledge, social/professional role and identity, beliefs about consequences, social influences and emotion. In this large, prospective, population-wide study, a financial incentive moderately increased FVA in dental practice. Novel longitudinal use of a validated theoretical framework to understand behavioural mechanisms suggested that financial incentives operate through complex inter-linked belief systems. While financial incentives are useful in narrowing the gap between clinical guidelines and FVA, multiple intervention approaches are required.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 101 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 11%
Student > Bachelor 9 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Researcher 6 6%
Other 16 16%
Unknown 38 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 9%
Social Sciences 7 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 3%
Other 14 14%
Unknown 43 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 July 2018.
All research outputs
#7,514,969
of 23,094,276 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#1,238
of 1,725 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#127,995
of 326,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#41
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,094,276 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,725 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,767 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.