Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32399201›Full record

Trial reportF1000Research2020

An evaluation of a personalised text message reminder compared to a standard text message on postal questionnaire response rates: an embedded randomised controlled trial.

Ann Cochrane, Charlie Welch, Caroline Fairhurst, Sarah Cockayne, David J Torgerson, OTIS Study Group

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in F1000Research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Methods to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Strategies to improve retention in randomised trials.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ann CochraneYork Trials Unit, University of York, York, UK.
Charlie WelchYork Trials Unit, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2421-5538
Caroline FairhurstYork Trials Unit, University of York, York, UK.
Sarah CockayneYork Trials Unit, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1288-5497
David J TorgersonYork Trials Unit, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1667-4275
OTIS Study Group
University of York · GB

Funding

Department of Health 14/49/149
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

Cell PhoneReminder SystemsText MessagingAccidental FallsAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleReference StandardsSurveys and Questionnairespersonalisedpostal questionnaireRandomised Controlled TrialreminderSMS textSWAT

Identifiers

PMID32399201
PMCPMC7194505
OpenAlexW3008128071

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.