ArticleInternet interventions2019
How one small text change in a study document can impact recruitment rates and follow-up completions.
Article in Internet interventions, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02977026 (Comparing the Efficacy of the Alcohol Help Centre and Check Your Drinking to a no Intervention Control Condition), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
Comparing the Efficacy of the Alcohol Help Centre and Check Your Drinking to a no Intervention Control Condition: Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Investigating if changing the wording of a study invitation letter increased recruitment in a project promoting tobacco cessation in a town with high smoking rates.Substance abuse treatment, prevention, and policy · 2026Trial
- Patient engagement and shared decision-making in trial recruitment intervention studies: a systematic review.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Review
- Describing the content of trial recruitment interventions using the TIDieR reporting checklist: a systematic methodology review.BMC medical research methodology · 2024Article
- Disparities in Research Participation by Level of Health Literacy.Mayo Clinic proceedings · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe validity and reliability of longitudinal research is highly dependent on the recruitment and retention of representative samples. Various strategies have been developed and tested for improving recruitment and follow-up rates into health-behavioural research, but few have examined the role of linguistic choices and study document readability on participation rates. This study examined the impact of one small text change, assigning an inappropriate or grade-8 reading level password for intervention access, on participation rates and attrition in an online alcohol intervention trial.
methodsParticipants were recruited into an online alcohol intervention study using Amazon's Mechanical Turk via a multi-step recruitment process which required participants to log into a study portal using a pre-assigned password. Passwords were qualitatively coded as grade-8 and/or inappropriate for use within a professional setting. Separate logistic regressions examined which demographic, clinical characteristics, and password categorizations were most strongly associated with recruitment rates and follow-up completions.
resultsInappropriate passwords were a barrier for recruitment among participants with post-secondary education as compared to those with less education (
conclusionsAltogether, these findings suggest that some linguistic choices may play an important role in recruitment, while others, such as readability, may have longer-term effects on follow-up rates and attrition. Possible explanations for the findings, as well as, sample selection biases during recruitment and follow-up are discussed. Limitations of the study are stated and recommendations for researchers are provided.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02977026. Registered 27 Nov 2016.
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.