Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31670216›Full record

ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2019

Comparing in person and internet methods to recruit low-SES populations for tobacco control policy research.

Amelia Greiner Safi, Carolyn Reyes, Emma Jesch, Joseph Steinhardt, Jeff Niederdeppe, Christofer Skurka, Motasem Kalaji, Leah Scolere, Sahara Byrne

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Recruitment Methods, Inclusion, and Successful Participation in a Longitudinal Clinical Trial Using Ecological Momentary Assessment.Health education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education · 2024
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

9 authors.

Amelia Greiner SafiDepartment of Communication, Cornell University, 450B Mann Library Building, Ithaca, NY, 14853, USA; Master of Public Health Program, Department of Population Medicine and Diagnostic Sciences, Cornell University, S2002 Schurman Hall, Ithaca, NY, 14853, USA. Electronic address: alg52@cornell.edu.
Carolyn ReyesDepartment of Communication, Cornell University, 450B Mann Library Building, Ithaca, NY, 14853, USA; Department of Agricultural Economics, Sociology, and Education, Pennsylvania State University, 111 Armsby Building, University Park, PA, 16802, USA.
Emma JeschDepartment of Communication, Cornell University, 450B Mann Library Building, Ithaca, NY, 14853, USA; Annenberg School of Communication, The University of Pennsylvania, 3620 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
Joseph SteinhardtDepartment of Advertising and Public Relations, Michigan State University, 404 Wilson Road, Office 377, East Lansing, MI, 48824, USA.
Jeff NiederdeppeDepartment of Communication, Cornell University, 450B Mann Library Building, Ithaca, NY, 14853, USA.
Christofer SkurkaDonald P. Bellisario College of Communications, Pennsylvania State University, 222 Carnegie Building, University Park, PA, 16802, USA.
Motasem KalajiDepartment of Communication, Cornell University, 450B Mann Library Building, Ithaca, NY, 14853, USA.
Leah ScolereDepartment of Design and Merchandising, Colorado State University, 1100 Meridian Avenue, Fort Collins, CO, 80521, USA.
Sahara ByrneDepartment of Communication, Cornell University, 450B Mann Library Building, Ithaca, NY, 14853, USA.

Funding

Impact of Flavors in Tobacco Products: An Experimental Market AnalysisR01HD079612 · NICHD · CORNELL UNIVERSITY · PI BYRNE, SAHARA ELIZABETH, NIEDERDEPPE, JEFFREY D · 2014 to 2018
$3.1M
NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD079612
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tobacco use and the associated consequences are much more prevalent among low-SES populations in the U.S. However, tobacco-based research often does not include these harder-to-reach populations. This paper compares the effectiveness and drawbacks of three methods of recruiting low-SES adult smokers in the Northeast. From a 5-year, [funding blinded] grant about impacts of graphic warning labels on tobacco products, three separate means of recruiting low-SES adult smokers emerged: 1) in person in the field with a mobile lab vehicle, 2) in person in the field with tablet computers, and 3) online via Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk). We compared each of these methods in terms of the resulting participant demographics and the "pros" and "cons" of each approach including quality control, logistics, cost, and engagement. Field-based methods (with a mobile lab or in person with a tablet) yielded a greater proportion of disadvantaged participants who could be biochemically verified as current smokers-45% of the field-based sample had an annual income of <$10,000 compared to 16% of the MTurk sample; 40-45% of the field-based sample did not complete high school compared to 2.6% of the MTurk sample. MTurk-based recruitment was substantially less expensive to operate (1/14th the cost of field-based methods) was faster, and involved less logistical coordination, though was unable to provide immediate biochemical verification of current smoking status. Both MTurk and field-based methods provide access to low-SES participants-the difference is the proportion and the degree of disadvantage. For research and interventions where either inclusion considerations or external validity with low-SES populations is critical, especially the most disadvantaged, our research supports the use of field-based methods. It also highlights the importance of adequate funding and time to enable the recruitment and participation of these harder-to-reach populations.

Indexed as

Patient SelectionSocial ClassAdolescentAdultAgedFemaleHealth PolicyHumansInternetMaleMiddle AgedSmokersTobacco Use CessationAmazon mechanical turkDisadvantageField based samplingInclusionInternet samplingLow-SESRecruitmentTobacco control policy

Identifiers

PMID31670216
PMCPMC7047999

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.