[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"health-studies-list:{\"conditionNormalized\":\"risk-perception\",\"overallStatus\":[\"RECRUITING\",\"AVAILABLE\",\"NOT_YET_RECRUITING\"],\"orderBy\":\"LastUpdateSubmitDate:desc\",\"size\":25,\"offset\":0}":3,"health-study-condition:risk-perception":27},{"pageToken":4,"total":5,"offset":6,"count":5,"results":7},null,2,0,[8,48],{"id":9,"slug":10,"hasResults":11,"nctId":12,"briefTitle":13,"officialTitle":14,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":15,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":17,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":18,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":21,"phases":22,"briefSummary":24,"conditions":25,"keywords":29,"overallStatus":35,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":36,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":37,"startDateStruct":40,"completionDateStruct":42,"leadSponsor":44,"locationsCount":47},"100645458","testing-warning-labels-for-retail-cannabis-products-using-a-discrete-choice-experiment-100645458",false,"NCT07701304","Testing Warning Labels for Retail Cannabis Products Using a Discrete Choice Experiment","Developing and Testing Warning Labels for Retail Cannabis Products","Eligibility for participation includes: 1) being 21 years of age or older, 2) being able to speak and understand English, 3) self-reported having consumed cannabis in the last 30 days (any mode, e.g., flower, vape, edible, etc.), and 4) residing in a U.S. state or jurisdiction where retail (i.e., non-medical) cannabis use is legal.","ALL","21 Years",{"count":19,"type":20},450,"ESTIMATED","INTERVENTIONAL",[23],"NA","This discrete choice experiment (DCE) study aims to address gaps in cannabis packaging regulatory research by testing how variations in cannabis packaging and health warning design impact reactions to packaging and intentions about cannabis use. The goal of this work is to identify the most effective combination of health warning features to improve consumer awareness of cannabis health risks. Establishing criteria for cannabis products in the US is critical because inconsistent state guidelines have resulted in contradictory policies in legal retail states, arguably leading to increased hazardous use and failure to meet public health standards. The contributions of this study's outcomes are expected to be significant because they will benefit public health as cannabis becomes available in legal retail markets and regulatory and governmental agencies seek effective ways to communicate cannabis risks to the public.",[26,27,28],"Cannabis Use","Risk Perception","Decision Making",[30,31,32,33,34],"Cannabis warning labels","Discrete choice experiment","Risk perception","Cannabis use","Health communication","RECRUITING","2026-07-24",{"date":38,"type":39},"2026-07-27","ACTUAL",{"date":41,"type":39},"2026-05-19",{"date":43,"type":20},"2026-12-31",{"name":45,"class":46},"University of Oklahoma","OTHER",1,{"id":49,"slug":50,"hasResults":11,"nctId":51,"briefTitle":52,"officialTitle":53,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":54,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":55,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":56,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":21,"phases":58,"briefSummary":59,"conditions":60,"keywords":64,"overallStatus":69,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":70,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":71,"startDateStruct":73,"completionDateStruct":75,"leadSponsor":76,"locationsCount":4},"100639513","risk-perception-intervention-for-high-risk-diabetic-foot-100639513","NCT07581262","Risk Perception Intervention for High-Risk Diabetic Foot","Construction and Application of a Foot Ulcer Risk Perception Intervention Program for Diabetic Patients With High-risk Foot Based on Information Framework Effect","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Age ≥ 18 years old with good communication and cognitive abilities.\n2. Meet the World Health Organization (WHO) diagnostic criteria for Type 1 or Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.\n3. Meet the diagnostic criteria for high-risk diabetic foot according to the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) 2023 standards.\n4. Proficient in the use of a smartphone and related applications (e.g., WeChat).\n5. Voluntarily participate in the study and provide signed informed consent.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Patients with impaired consciousness, severe organ dysfunction, or other physical disabilities that lead to being bedbound or unable to perform foot care.\n2. Patients with peripheral neuropathy caused by non-diabetic factors (e.g., toxic, nutritional, or hereditary neuropathies).\n3. Patients with gestational diabetes or those with pre-existing diabetes who are currently pregnant.","18 Years",{"count":57,"type":20},90,[23],"This study aims to evaluate the effect of health education based on information framing effects on foot ulcer risk perception in patients at high risk of diabetic foot.\n\nStudy Design:\n\nA randomized controlled trial with three groups:\n\nExperimental Group 1 (Gain-Framed): Participants received a benefit framing message that emphasized the benefits of standardized foot care in reducing the likelihood and severity of foot ulcers, with an aim to reshape patients' perception of risk.\n\nExperimental Group 2 (Loss-Framed):Participants received a loss frame message that emphasized that neglecting foot care would increase the likelihood and severity of foot ulcers. The message was designed to awaken patients' awareness of crisis and risk perception.\n\nControl Group (Routine Messaging):Participants received the usual content of care in the endocrinology department without a specific framework.\n\nParticipants:\n\nDiabetic foot patients at high risk from experimental group 1, experimental group 2, and control group 3. Inclusion criteria included adults with a diagnosis of diabetic foot at high risk.\n\nIntervention:\n\nThe Total Study Period consisted of an intervention phase and a follow-up phase. The intervention phase started at the time of enrollment and lasted until the fourth week after discharge. The follow-up period lasted for 3 months. Data on local indicators were collected at baseline\u002Fbefore the intervention (T0), immediately after the intervention (T1), 1 month after the intervention (T2) and 3 months after the intervention (T3).\n\nOutcome Measures:\n\nPrimary Outcomes:\n\nFoot ulcer risk perception: Assessed using The Tripartite Model of Risk Perception Scale.\n\nSecondary Outcomes:\n\nFoot care behavior score: Assessed using The Nottingham Foot Care Assessment Scale; Self-efficacy: Assessed using The Diabetes Self-Efficacy Scale; Intention to delay seeking medical help score:Assessed using the Questionnaire on Intention to Delay Seeking Medical Care for Patients with High-Risk Diabetic Foot; the incidence\u002Frecurrence rate of foot ulcers, and various laboratory indicators.",[61,62,27,63],"Diabetes Mellitus","Diabetic Foot Ulcer (DFU)","Peripheral Neuropathy With Type 2 Diabetes",[65,66,67,68],"diabetes mellitus","high risk foot","diabetic foot ulcer","risk perception","NOT_YET_RECRUITING","2026-05-06",{"date":72,"type":39},"2026-05-12",{"date":74,"type":20},"2026-05-01",{"date":43,"type":20},{"name":77,"class":46},"The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University"]