Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 1, 2026

The Joint Effect of Social Comparison and Social Distance on Evaluation of Intertemporal Choice Outcomes in Event-related Potential Studies
Published on: August 25, 2023
Champions and early adopters in an implementation-effectiveness study of shared decision making: implications for
Jennifer L Ridgeway1,2, Megan E Branda3, Shubhangi Bagewadi3
1Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street, SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA. Ridgeway.Jennifer@mayo.edu.
Background:
Although recommended, shared decision making (SDM) is not widely adopted for primary prevention of cardiovascular (CV) disease. Champions may influence peer adoption if they are enthusiastic and skilled. We describe adoption of an SDM conversation aid for CV risk reduction (CV Prevention Choice) by champions and early adopters in a pragmatic implementation trial and consider their influence on uptake in clinics.
Methods:
We embedded the SDM tool in the electronic health record in three U.S. health care systems. Eight of their 15 affiliated clinics deployed a champion implementation strategy. Adopters used the SDM tool in ≥ 2 routine clinical encounters. Superusers had ≥ 20 encounters. Penetration was the proportion of adopters among eligible clinicians. Adoption and penetration were assessed in the usual care (early adoption), active implementation, and maintenance implementation phases. Thematic analysis methods were used to analyze qualitative data from individual interviews and periodic reflections.
Results:
Between May 2021 and January 2025, 37 interviews with clinicians and other staff and 65 periodic reflections were completed. Among 176 clinicians, 55% (n = 97) used CV Prevention Choice at least once and 42% (n = 76) adopted it. Champions and other opinion leaders gave presentations and demonstrated their practice, but targeted individual persuasion and group dialogue were less common, especially when champions appreciated peers' preferences. Champions used the tool more frequently (median = 93, IQR 53-150) than non-champions (median = 16, IQR 4-50), although only 4 of the top 20 users were champions. Clinics with champions had higher penetration rates (50% vs 29%) and lower rates of one-time tool use than clinics without champions (17% vs 33%).
Conclusion:
Champions, superusers, and other opinions leaders may influence peer adoption of clinical innovations by sharing their experience, but group discourse may be needed to build the case for uptake of innovations. Superusers may be impactful in clinics without formal champions.
Trial Registration:
The protocol described herein was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov on 22 June 2020 (No. NCT04450914).
Related Concept Videos
Persuasion Strategies
Social Proof
Relationship Formation
Strategies of Self-Presentation I: Strategic Self-Presentation
Decision Making: Traditional Method
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is decided based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to this claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses, out of which a null hypothesis would be a...
Decision Making: P-value Method
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is proposed. The claim is based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to the claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses: a null hypothesis would be a neutral statement while the alternative hypothesis can have a...