A US$10 reward at testing got more people in Ecuador tested for HIV

The study

1. 01

   Who took part

   7,720 adults recruited at four public places in Esmeraldas, Ecuador. Nearly 60% were women, and 27% were aged 18 to 22.

2. 02

   What they did

   Everyone heard the same information about getting an HIV test and was offered a free, anonymous one. Some were also offered a US$10 reward at testing. Others were offered a US$10 reward when they collected results, or a private promise to get tested within two weeks.

3. 03

   What happened

   Testing rose from 12.2% to 66.3% with the reward at testing. Learning status rose from 5.3% to 14.8%, though fewer of those tested picked up results. The later reward and the private promise made no clear difference to testing or learning status. The reward at testing also found more new HIV cases: 0.75% against 0.14%. Only 19 were found in all, so that result is preliminary.

What the study found

1. HelpedGoals

   A US$10 reward at testing got more people tested for HIV than information alone did.

   • Rule: Get a reward or payment for doing ittested
   • Rule: Reward yourself right aftertested

   Large randomised trial of 7,720 adults in Esmeraldas, Ecuador · vs people given information alone · behaviour was recorded · ⚠ whole groups were assigned, not people

2. HelpedGoals

   The reward at testing got more people to learn their HIV status, though fewer of those tested picked up results.

   • Rule: Get a reward or payment for doing ittested
   • Rule: Reward yourself right aftertested

   Large randomised trial of 7,720 adults in Esmeraldas, Ecuador · vs people given information alone · behaviour was recorded · ⚠ whole groups were assigned, not people

3. HelpedProcrastination

   Among people who got tested, the reward at testing cut the wait before testing by about a day.

   • Rule: Get a reward or payment for doing ittested
   • Rule: Reward yourself right aftertested

   Large randomised trial of 7,720 adults in Esmeraldas, Ecuador · vs people given information alone · behaviour was recorded · ⚠ whole groups were assigned, not people

4. No differenceGoals

   A US$10 reward paid later did not get more people tested than information alone.

   • Rule: Get a reward or payment for doing ittested

   Large randomised trial of 7,720 adults in Esmeraldas, Ecuador · vs people given information alone · behaviour was recorded · ⚠ whole groups were assigned, not people

Source