An interventional study of Group 1 information and Group 2 information in Incentive, sponsored by ThinkWell. Completed at 1 site in United Kingdom. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2021-03-22.
Sponsored by ThinkWell · Not applicable, Interventional, and Health services research
Questionnaires are frequently used in online research, however recruiting, and completion rates of online participants from a variety of cultures and demographic backgrounds can be challenging. The challenge is greater in an online cohort because there is no way to observe the participant beyond what is contributed online. Poor recruiting and completion can result in underpowered research that may not be representative of the sample population. This can trigger an increase in costs as the recruitment period may have to be extended until sample size is reached. When recruiting and completion rates are inadequate studies may have to be terminated and the answer to the research question can remain unknown.
To mitigate these challenges, incentives may be offered in the form of gift certificate draws. There is uncertainty about whether this strategy is effective in online research and if the value of the incentive alters the outcome. A randomised trial can be used to test the intervention to establish an evidence base.
This study (SupMatQT) proposes to link with a large 20,000 person international cohort study (SupMat) that will test the utility and preferences of journal supplementary materials for reviewers, authors,and readers. The research described here will examine the evidence of effect for offering a prize draw incentive on rates of recruitment, and completion for consented participants. All participants will be entered in the draw. Information about the value of the incentive of a prize draw will differ according to what group a participant is randomized to. The entry in the prize draw will not be conditional on levels of participation or group allocation.
The other question researchers will address is what effect do survey reminders have on outcomes? All non-responders will be sent an initial reminder to complete the survey (Group A) and for those who have still not responded a second reminder will be sent 14 days later (Group B). Outcomes will be compared at three time points: for initial response, following reminder 1(Group A), and following reminder 2 (Group B).
The Role of Supplementary Material in Journal Articles is a research collaboration between the BMJ, University of Oxford, and Queen's University Belfast where the research team aims to explore the usage patterns of supplementary materials for journal articles by authors, peer reviewers, and readers and to compare authors, peer reviewers and readers responses to these materials. The large cohort provides a unique opportunity to conduct methodology research with online participants using a nested cohort study defined as a study within a trial (SWAT). The nested study "The Role of Supplementary Material in Journal Articles Questionnaire Study " will explore the effects of recruitment and survey completion when a prize draw for participants is included in the invitation letter.
Large research populations can struggle to recruit participants and to obtain complete data. This can have a direct effect on the robustness of the findings and can undermine the often substantial investment, participants, researchers, and sponsors have made in the research. This research waste may undermine public trust and community enthusiasm for the research process. It may seem logical to offer a prize-winning draw as an incentive but only a trial can give objective information about how well this intervention works. It is cost effective to embed this research at the beginning of an existing large cohort study as funding may not be available to test the intervention as a stand alone question. The additional question of interest addressed will be asking whether one survey reminder or two is more effective in terms of recruitment and survey completion rates. The question is practical as ineffective reminders use researcher resources, increase the burden of participation on the participant and could build resentment if the respondent feels "spammed" whereas the ideal balance of reminders will result in increased recruitment and survey completion rates.
Participants in this cohort are drawn from a convenience sample of BMJ Publishing Group's journals that have a spread of Impact Factors, including the BMJ. Included journals have a website and publish supplementary material.
Devoting time and resources to understand what strategies will mobilize participants to remain motivated to join a study and complete the conditions is good planning and contributes to robust methods that other researchers can replicate. To the investigators' knowledge, no similar work has been conducted solely within the online population of readers, peer reviewers and authors of an academic journal group.
The aims of the study are to test the effect of:
The research question(s) this research explores is, what effect does the knowledge of being entered into a prize draw have on the rates of recruitment and completion in the study and does varying the value of the incentive influence the outcomes. The study will describe how or if these rates differ between authors, reviewers, and readers. The second question is how does one v two reminders influence recruitment and completion rates.
Participants (authors, reviewers ,and readers) will be invited to take part in the study and will be randomized into one of five trial arms:
All potential participants who are non-responders will receive one reminder to complete the survey (Group A), For those who are still non-responders the initial reminder will be followed by an additional reminder 14 days later (Group B)
Group one will receive information within the invitation letter that they will be entered into a prize draw to win a 100% of an Amazon gift certificate or the currency equivalent.
Group two will receive information within the invitation letter that they will be entered into a prize draw to win a 75% of an Amazon gift certificate or the currency equivalent.
Group three will receive information within the invitation letter that they will be entered into a prize draw to win a 50% of an Amazon gift certificate or the currency equivalent.
Group four will receive information within the invitation letter that they will be entered into a prize draw to win a 25% of an Amazon gift certificate or the currency equivalent.
Group five will not receive any information about the prize draw for an Amazon gift certificate in the invitation letter.
ThinkWell is the lead sponsor of 9 studies on the registry; none are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
Group 1 Information about the prize draw incentive for 100% of an Amazon gift (or currency equivalent) in the invitation letter.
Other: Group 1 information
Group 2 Information about the prize draw incentive for 75% of an Amazon gift (or currency equivalent) in the invitation letter.
Other: Group 2 information
Group 3 Information about the prize draw incentive for 50% of an Amazon gift (or currency equivalent) in the invitation letter.
Other: Group 3 information
Group 4 Information about the prize draw incentive for 25% of an Amazon gift (or currency equivalent) in the invitation letter.
Other: Group 4 information
Group 5 No Information incentive for an Amazon gift certificate (or currency equivalent) in the invitation letter.
Other: Group 5 no information
One survey reminder at 14 days
Other: Group A Reminder
Two survey reminders 14 days and 28 days
Other: Group B Reminders
Group 1 prize draw information for participants to win 100% of an Amazon gift card (or currency equivalent) in invitation letter.
Group 2 prize draw information for participants to win 75% of an Amazon gift card (or currency equivalent) in invitation letter.
Group 3 prize draw information for participants to win 50% of an Amazon gift card (or currency equivalent) in invitation letter.
Group 4 prize draw information for participants to win 25% of an Amazon gift card (or currency equivalent) in invitation letter.
Group 5 no Information for participants to enter a draw to win an Amazon gift card (or currency equivalent) in invitation letter.
One survey reminder at 14 days
Two survey reminders one at 14 days and one at 28 days
Completion
proportion of questions completed in the questionnaire
Time frame: Duration of study up to 60 days
Recruitment
proportion of sample recruited • Secondary Outcome Measure: proportion of sample recruited Comparison of recruitment numbers between Groups one through five and Groups A and B
Time frame: Duration of study up to 60 days
Plan to share: No — Data will be shared in aggregated form upon request in order to comply with data protection policies
This study is completed, as verified in Mar 2021. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
ThinkWell