ArticleBMC medical research methodology2012
Internet trials: participant experiences and perspectives.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A systematic review of methods used to conduct decentralised clinical trials.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2022Pooled it
- Mapping of Crowdsourcing in Health: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2018Pooled it
- Trial
- Trial
- Participant experiences of an internet-based intervention and randomised control trial: interview study.BMC public health · 2013Trial
- The Future is Local: the Role of Decentralised Clinical Trials in Patients with Advanced Cancer Receiving Palliative Care.Current treatment options in oncology · 2026Review
- Addressing the Key Challenges of Decentralized Clinical Trials in Europe: Multistakeholder Perspective Delphi Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Article
- Adapting the ADVANCE group program for digitally-supported delivery to reduce intimate partner violence by men in substance use treatment: a feasibility study.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Article
- Decentralized clinical trials (DCTs): A few ethical considerations.Frontiers in public health · 2022Review
- Article
- A REDCap-based model for online interventional research: Parent sleep education in autism.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2021Article
- Methodological Challenges in Web-Based Trials: Update and Insights From the Relatives Education and Coping Toolkit Trial.JMIR mental health · 2020Article
- Pitfalls in interpretation of large registry data on hernia repair.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2018Article
- Privacy, Trust, and Data Sharing in Web-Based and Mobile Research: Participant Perspectives in a Large Nationwide Sample of Men Who Have Sex With Men in the United States.Journal of medical Internet research · 2018Article
- Electronic case report forms and electronic data capture within clinical trials and pharmacoepidemiology.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2017Review
- The Development, Validation, and User Evaluation of Foodbook24: A Web-Based Dietary Assessment Tool Developed for the Irish Adult Population.Journal of medical Internet research · 2017Article
- Feasibility and Outcomes of an Internet-Based Mindfulness Training Program: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR mental health · 2016Article
- Acceptability of financial incentives for breastfeeding: thematic analysis of readers' comments to UK online news reports.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2015Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUse of the Internet to conduct randomised controlled trials is increasing, and provides potential to increase equity of access to medical research, increase the generalisability of trial results and decrease the costs involved in conducting large scale trials. Several studies have compared response rates, completeness of data, and reliability of surveys using the Internet and traditional methods, but very little is known about participants' attitudes towards Internet-based randomised trials or their experience of participating in an Internet-based trial.
objectiveTo obtain insights into the experiences and perspectives of participants in an Internet-based randomised controlled trial, their attitudes to the use of the Internet to conduct medical research, and their intentions regarding future participation in Internet research.
methodsAll English speaking participants in a recently completed Internet randomised controlled trial were invited to participate in an online survey.
results1246 invitations were emailed. 416 participants completed the survey between May and October 2009 (33% response rate). Reasons given for participating in the Internet RCT fell into 4 main areas: personal interest in the research question and outcome, ease of participation, an appreciation of the importance of research and altruistic reasons. Participants' comments and reflections on their experience of participating in a fully online trial were positive and less than half of participants would have participated in the trial had it been conducted using other means of data collection. However participants identified trade-offs between the benefits and downsides of participating in Internet-based trials. The main trade-off was between flexibility and convenience - a perceived benefit - and a lack connectedness and understanding - a perceived disadvantage. The other tradeoffs were in the areas of: ease or difficulty in use of the Internet; security, privacy and confidentiality issues; perceived benefits and disadvantages for researchers; technical aspects of using the Internet; and the impact of Internet data collection on information quality. Overall, more advantages were noted by participants, consistent with their preference for this mode of research over others. The majority of participants (69%) would prefer to participate in Internet-based research compared to other modes of data collection in the future.
conclusionParticipants in our survey would prefer to participate in Internet-based trials in the future compared to other ways of conducting trials. From the participants' perspective, participating in Internet-based trials involves trade-offs. The central trade-off is between flexibility and convenience - a perceived benefit - and lack of connectedness and understanding - a perceived disadvantage. Strategies to maintain the convenience of the Internet while increasing opportunities for participants to feel supported, well-informed and well-understood would seem likely to increase the acceptability of Internet-based trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.