Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30442187›Full record

Trial reportBMC research notes2018

To send or not to send: weighing the costs and benefits of mailing an advance letter to participants before a telephone survey.

Christina Schell, Alexandra Godinho, Vladyslav Kushnir, John A Cunningham

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC research notes, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03097445 (Long-term Effectiveness of Mailed Nicotine Replacement Therapy), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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.

NCT03097445 nacompletednot on this map

Long-term Effectiveness of Mailed Nicotine Replacement Therapy: A 5-year Follow-up

TypeinterventionalSponsorCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthRan2017 to 2019Enrolled1,000ConditionsSmoking CessationArmsNicotine patch
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
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

4 authors.

Christina SchellInstitute of Mental Health and Policy Research, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, 33 Russell St., Toronto, ON, M5S 2S1, Canada.
Alexandra GodinhoInstitute of Mental Health and Policy Research, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, 33 Russell St., Toronto, ON, M5S 2S1, Canada.
Vladyslav KushnirSt. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Canada.
John A CunninghamInstitute of Mental Health and Policy Research, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, 33 Russell St., Toronto, ON, M5S 2S1, Canada. john.cunningham@camh.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0668-5982

Funding

Canadian Cancer Society 704949
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveA letter was mailed to half the participants (Letter = 137; No Letter = 138) of a 5-year follow-up survey regarding smoking cessation before attempting contact for a telephone interview. The primary outcome was the number of completed surveys per group (response rate). Secondary analyses of the number of telephone calls placed and a cost analysis were performed.

resultsNo conclusive effect was found on the response rates per group (59.1% Letter, 50.0% No Letter; p = 0.147). Additionally, a logistic regression, controlling for demographics, revealed that there was no direct effect of sending the letter on response rate (p = 0.369). Non-parametric analysis showed significantly fewer calls (U = 7962.5, z = - 2.274, p < 0.05 two-tailed) and significantly lower costs (U = 11112.00, z = 2.521, p < 0.05 two-tailed) in reaching participants in the Letter group. Mailing an advance letter to participants did not appear to effect response rates between the groups, even when controlling for demographics. However, further analysis examining the number of call attempts and the costs per group revealed the letter may have had other effects. These findings suggest that additional analyses may be merited when evaluating the effectiveness of methods to increase participation, such as an advance letter, especially in cases where the literature largely supports its effectual use. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03097445. Registered 31 March 2017.

Indexed as

Postal ServiceAdultCosts and Cost AnalysisFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedSmokingSmoking CessationSmoking PreventionSurveys and QuestionnairesTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeAdvance letterCost-analysisPre-notificationSmokersSmoking cessationTelephone survey

Identifiers

PMID30442187
PMCPMC6238335

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.