Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31066715›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2019

Evaluation of Different Recruitment Methods: Longitudinal, Web-Based, Pan-European Physical Activity Through Sustainable Transport Approaches (PASTA) Project.

Mailin Gaupp-Berghausen, Elisabeth Raser, Esther Anaya-Boig, Ione Avila-Palencia, Audrey de Nazelle, Evi Dons, Helen Franzen, Regine Gerike, Thomas Götschi, Francesco Iacorossi and 10 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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.

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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

20 authors.

Mailin Gaupp-BerghausenInstitute for Transport Studies, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0003-4222-753X
Elisabeth Raser *Institute for Transport Studies, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-0940-7259
Esther Anaya-BoigCentre for Environmental Policy, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-9204-534X
Ione Avila-PalenciaISGlobal, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-4353-2256
Audrey de NazelleCentre for Environmental Policy, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-1092-3971
Evi DonsCentre for Environmental Sciences, Hasselt University, Hasselt, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-6745-7246
Helen FranzenICLEI, European Secretariat GmbH, Freiburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-1176-0016
Regine GerikeChair of Integrated Transport Planning and Traffic Engineering, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-8063-6636
Thomas GötschiPhysical Activity and Health Unit, Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-1202-7863
Francesco IacorossiAgenzia Roma Servizi per la Mobilità, Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-9274-4370
Reinhard HössingerInstitute for Transport Studies, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-0090-0573
Mark NieuwenhuijsenISGlobal, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-9461-7981
David Rojas-RuedaISGlobal, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-5854-2484
Julian SanchezLondon Borough of Newham, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-6493-5583
Emilia SmedsDepartment of Science, Technology, Engineering and Public Policy, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-8968-3500
Manja DeforthPhysical Activity and Health Unit, Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-1111-1799
Arnout StandaertFlemish Institute for Technological Research (VITO), Mol, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-7711-7141
Erik StigellTrivector Traffic AB, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-6518-5558
Tom Cole-HunterISGlobal, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-6827-6084
Luc Int PanisFlemish Institute for Technological Research (VITO), Mol, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-2558-4351

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSufficient sample size and minimal sample bias are core requirements for empirical data analyses. Combining opportunistic recruitment with a Web-based survey and data-collection platform yields new benefits over traditional recruitment approaches.

objectiveThis paper aims to report the success of different recruitment methods and obtain data on participants' characteristics, participation behavior, recruitment rates, and representativeness of the sample.

methodsA longitudinal, Web-based survey was implemented as part of the European PASTA (Physical Activity through Sustainable Transport Approaches) project, between November 2014 and December 2016. During this period, participants were recruited from 7 European cities on a rolling basis. A standardized guide on recruitment strategy was developed for all cities, to reach a sufficient number of adult participants. To make use of the strengths and minimize weakness, a combination of different opportunistic recruitment methods was applied. In addition, the random sampling approach was applied in the city of Örebro. To reduce the attrition rate and improve real-time monitoring, the Web-based platform featured a participant's and a researchers' user interface and dashboard.

resultsOverall, 10,691 participants were recruited; most people found out about the survey through their workplace or employer (2300/10691, 21.51%), outreach promotion (2219/10691, 20.76%), and social media (1859/10691, 17.39%). The average number of questionnaires filled in per participant varied significantly between the cities (P<.001), with the highest number in Zurich (11.0, SE 0.33) and the lowest in Örebro (4.8, SE 0.17). Collaboration with local organizations, the use of Facebook and mailing lists, and direct street recruitment were the most effective approaches in reaching a high share of participants (P<.001). Considering the invested working hours, Facebook was one of the most time-efficient methods. Compared with the cities' census data, the composition of study participants was broadly representative in terms of gender distribution; however, the study included younger and better-educated participants.

conclusionsWe observed that offering a mixed recruitment approach was highly effective in achieving a high participation rate. The highest attrition rate and the lowest average number of questionnaires filled in per participant were observed in Örebro, which also recruited participants through random sampling. These findings suggest that people who are more interested in the topic are more willing to participate and stay in a survey than those who are selected randomly and may not have a strong connection to the research topic. Although direct face-to-face contacts were very effective with respect to the number of recruited participants, recruiting people through social media was not only effective but also very time efficient. The collected data are based on one of the largest recruited longitudinal samples with a common recruitment strategy in different European cities.

Indexed as

AdultEuropeExerciseFemaleHumansInternetLongitudinal StudiesMaleMiddle AgedResearch DesignSocial MediaSurveys and Questionnaireslongitudinal surveymobile phonemulticentralopportunistic samplingrecruitmentWeb-based questionnaireWeb-based survey

Identifiers

PMID31066715
PMCPMC6533046

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.