Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30252908›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

A hierarchical clustering approach to identify repeated enrollments in web survey data.

Elizabeth A Handorf, Carolyn J Heckman, Susan Darlow, Michael Slifker, Lee Ritterband

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Elizabeth A HandorfBiostatistics and Bioinformatics Facility, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-0445-8978
Carolyn J HeckmanDepartment of Medical Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey, United States of America.
Susan DarlowNational Comprehensive Cancer Network, Fort Washington, PA, United States of America.
Michael SlifkerBiostatistics and Bioinformatics Facility, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, United States of America.
Lee RitterbandDepartment of Psychiatry and Neurobehavioral Sciences, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, United States of America.

Funding

WORD PROCESSING CENTER--COREP30CA006927 · NCI · RESEARCH INST OF FOX CHASE CAN CTR · PI Dietmar J Kappes · 1985 to 2026
$138.8M
TRAINING PROGRAM IN CANCER RESEARCHT32CA009035 · NCI · RESEARCH INST OF FOX CHASE CAN CTR · PI CHERNOFF, JONATHAN · 1985 to 2020
$10.5M
A Tailored Internet Intervention for Skin Cancer Risk Reduction in Young AdultsR01CA154928 · NCI · RESEARCH INST OF FOX CHASE CAN CTR · PI HECKMAN, CAROLYN · 2011 to 2014
$1.7M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA006927NCI NIH HHS R01 CA154928NCI NIH HHS T32 CA009035
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionOnline surveys are a valuable tool for social science research, but the perceived anonymity provided by online administration may lead to problematic behaviors from study participants. Particularly, if a study offers incentives, some participants may attempt to enroll multiple times. We propose a method to identify clusters of non-independent enrollments in a web-based study, motivated by an analysis of survey data which tests the effectiveness of an online skin-cancer risk reduction program.

methodsTo identify groups of enrollments, we used a hierarchical clustering algorithm based on the Euclidean distance matrix formed by participant responses to a series of Likert-type eligibility questions. We then systematically identified clusters that are unusual in terms of both size and similarity, by repeatedly simulating datasets from the empirical distribution of responses under the assumption of independent enrollments. By performing the clustering algorithm on the simulated datasets, we determined the distribution of cluster size and similarity under independence, which is then used to identify groups of outliers in the observed data. Next, we assessed 12 other quality indicators, including previously proposed and study-specific measures. We summarized the quality measures by cluster membership, and compared the cluster groupings to those found when using the quality indicators with latent class modeling. RESULTS AND

conclusionsWhen we excluded the clustered enrollments and/or lower-quality latent classes from the analysis of study outcomes, the estimates of the intervention effect were larger. This demonstrates how including repeat or low quality participants can introduce bias into a web-based study. As much as is possible, web-based surveys should be designed to verify participant quality. Our method can be used to verify survey quality and identify problematic groups of enrollments when necessary.

Indexed as

Data AnalysisInternetSurveys and QuestionnairesAlgorithmsCluster AnalysisHumansMotivationRisk AssessmentSkin Neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID30252908
PMCPMC6155511

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.