Trial reportF1000Research2020
Enclosing a pen to improve response rate to postal questionnaire: an embedded randomised controlled trial.
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 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Methods to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Strategies to improve retention in randomised trials.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Improving postal survey response using behavioural science: a nested randomised control trial.BMC medical research methodology · 2021Trial
- Trial Forge Guidance 4: a guideline for reporting the results of randomised Studies Within A Trial (SWATs).Trials · 2024Article
- Undertaking Studies Within A Trial to evaluate recruitment and retention strategies for randomised controlled trials: lessons learnt from the PROMETHEUS research programme.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2024Article
- Challenges and solutions to the implementation of studies within a trial: The experiences of the PROMETHEUS programme.Research methods in medicine & health sciences · 2023Article
- Including a pen and/or cover letter, containing social incentive text, had no effect on questionnaire response rate: a factorial randomised controlled Study within a Trial.F1000Research · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.
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.