Trial reportBMC medical research methodology2018
Effects of pre-notification, invitation length, questionnaire length and reminder on participation rate: a quasi-randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC medical research methodology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 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
25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Methods to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Does advance contact with research participants increase response to questionnaires: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medical research methodology · 2021Pooled it
- Effects of a Co-Design-Based Invitation Strategy on Participation in a Preventive Health Check Program: Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2021Trial
- Using the CFIR 2.0 Framework to Assess the Implementation of GARDE: A Population Health Management Tool for Hereditary Cancer Risk.Research square · 2026Article
- Respondent fatigue in clinical practice: exploring the challenges of increasing PROMS and PREMS utilization in a tertiary hospital.BMC medical research methodology · 2026Article
- High prevalence and predictive modeling of compassion fatigue in geriatric nursing practice.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- Evaluation of healthcare simulation centers: development of the "STRIVE" tool using the Delphi method.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- The revised version of significant quality of life measure (SigQOLM-36).BMC research notes · 2025Article
- Article
- The ActiveText@T2D text messaging behavioural intervention to increase physical activity in adults with type 2 diabetes: A prospective single-arm feasibility trial.PLOS digital health · 2025Article
- Aftercare following fatal traumatic injuries, needs and questions: a level 1 trauma center study and scoping review.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2025Article
- Relationship Between Past Survey Burden and Response Probability to a New Survey in a Probability-Based Online Panel.Journal of official statistics · 2022Article
- Article
- Latent tuberculosis screening and treatment in HIV: highly acceptable in a prospective cohort study.ERJ open research · 2022Article
- Validation of Visual Analogue Scales of job demand and job control at the workplace: a cross-sectional study.BMJ open · 2022Observational
- The association between oral dryness and use of dry-mouth interventions in Sjögren's syndrome patients.Clinical oral investigations · 2022Article
- Article
- The Effect of the Familiarity of a Survey Sender on Response Outcomes in a Large-Scale Survey of Emergency Medical Services Agencies.Evaluation & the health professions · 2021Article
- A cross-sectional survey examining motivation and beliefs to participating in a web-based prospective cohort study on nutrition and health among individuals with a low socioeconomic status.BMC public health · 2020Article
- Self-reported data in environmental health studies: mail vs. web-based surveys.BMC medical research methodology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundImproving participation rates in epidemiologic studies using questionnaires and biological sampling is important for the generalizability of the outcome. The aim of this study was to examine the effects of pre-notification, invitation length, questionnaire length, and reminder on participation rate and to investigate whether some factors contributed to participants doing both the questionnaire and blood sampling as oppose to only one part.
methodsOur study was embedded within the pilot testing of a large population-based study about prostate cancer screening. Our study sample consisted of 28.134 men between 50 and 69 years of age and living in the region of Stockholm (Sweden) invited to respond to a web-based questionnaire and to provide blood for prostate cancer testing. The men were randomly allocated according to birth of date to receive either: (a) a pre-notification postcard or not; (b) a shorter or a longer invitation letter; (c) a shorter or a longer web-based questionnaire, and (d) a reminder or not. The effects of the survey design factors were tested using chi-square.
resultsThe use of a pre-notification (p < 0.0001), a longer questionnaire (p = 0.004) and the use of a reminder (p = 0.02) were associated with an increase in overall participation, i.e. responding to the questionnaire or providing blood for PCT or performing both components.
conclusionsThe results of this pilot study justified the use of a pre-notification and a reminder in the following large population based study since the benefits of increased participation traded off against the greater costs incurred. Furthermore, we were able to use the longer version of the questionnaire, which allowed us to collect more information without risking a lower response rate.
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.