← CVS Health Interview Insights
This was basically nine questions stuffed into one.
Structure your answer around the experiment lifecycle: design (targeting, randomization, holdout), measurement (metrics, power, ground truth), execution (frequency capping, creative testing, seasonality), and analysis (compliance, causal methods). Emphasize healthcare-specific constraints like HIPAA and opt-out compliance, and show how you'd handle randomization breaks with a fallback causal method.
Pro tip: In healthcare experiments, always pre-specify how you'll source ground-truth vaccination status (e.g., claims data with a 30-day lag) and account for it in your power analysis; otherwise, you risk underpowering your study or missing the primary endpoint.
Specify inclusion criteria (eligible members: age, risk factors, no prior flu shot this season) and exclusion rules (opt-outs, recent vaccinations, contraindications). Choose randomization unit (member-level) and holdout structure (e.g., 10% pure control, 90% treatment with nested creative tests).
Identify primary metric (verified flu vaccination within 30 days) and guardrail metrics (opt-out rate, complaint rate, email engagement). Source ground truth from claims data, immunization registries, or EHRs, and define verification windows.
Calculate sample size for 2% baseline, 20% relative uplift (2.4% absolute), alpha=0.05, power=0.80. Use power analysis to determine required sample per arm, then design frequency capping (e.g., max 2 emails/week) and creative testing (A/B/n subject lines, content) within the treatment group.
Control for seasonality by randomizing within blocks (e.g., by geography or enrollment date) or using time-series methods. Ensure HIPAA compliance (de-identified data, secure transmission) and opt-out mechanisms (unsubscribe link, preference center) are in place.
Pre-specify analysis: intention-to-treat (ITT) with logistic regression, covariate adjustment, and subgroup analyses. If randomization breaks, use instrumental variables, propensity score matching, or difference-in-differences as fallback causal methods.
AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.