Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34419121›Full record

Trial reportTrials2021

Evaluation of the effectiveness of an incentive strategy on the questionnaire response rate in parents of premature babies: a randomised controlled Study Within A Trial (SWAT) nested within SIFT.

Edmund Juszczak, Oliver Hewer, Christopher Partlett, Madeleine Hurd, Vasha Bari, Ursula Bowler, Louise Linsell, Jon Dorling, SIFT Investigator Group

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Trials, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Methods to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. 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 at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Edmund Juszczak *National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. ed.juszczak@nottingham.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5500-2247
Oliver Hewer *National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Christopher PartlettNational Perinatal Epidemiology Unit Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Madeleine HurdNational Perinatal Epidemiology Unit Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Vasha BariNational Perinatal Epidemiology Unit Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Ursula BowlerNational Perinatal Epidemiology Unit Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Louise LinsellNational Perinatal Epidemiology Unit Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Jon DorlingDivision of Neonatal-Perinatal Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada.
SIFT Investigator Group
University of Oxford · GBUniversity of Nottingham · GBDalhousie University · CAEdinburgh Royal Infirmary · GB

Funding

Health Technology Assessment Programme 11/01/25
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLoss to follow-up resulting in missing outcomes compromises the validity of trial results by reducing statistical power, negatively affecting generalisability and undermining assumptions made at analysis, leading to potentially biased and misleading results. Evidence that incentives are effective at improving response rates exists, but there is little evidence regarding the best approach, especially in the field of perinatal medicine. The NIHR-funded SIFT trial follow-up of infants at 2 years of age provided an ideal opportunity to address this remaining uncertainty.

methodsParticipants: parents of infants from participating neonatal units in the UK and Ireland followed up for SIFT (multicentre RCT investigating two speeds of feeding in babies with gestational age at birth < 32 weeks and/or birthweight < 1500 g).

interventionsparents were randomly allocated to receive incentives (£15 gift voucher) before or after questionnaire return. The objective was to establish whether offering an unconditional incentive in advance or promising an incentive on completion of a questionnaire (conditional) improved the response rate in parents of premature babies. The primary outcome was questionnaire response rate. Permuted block randomisation was performed (variable size blocks), stratified by SIFT allocation (slower/faster feeds) and single/multiple birth. Multiple births were given the same incentives allocation. Parents were unaware that they were in an incentives SWAT; SIFT office staff were not blinded to allocation.

resultsParents of 923 infants were randomised: 459 infants allocated to receive incentive before, 464 infants allocated to receive incentive after; analysis was by intention to treat. Allocation to the incentive before completion led to a significantly higher response rate, 83.0% (381/459) compared to the after-completion group, 76.1% (353/464); adjusted absolute difference of 6.8% (95% confidence interval 1.6% to 12.0%). Giving an incentive in advance is the more costly approach, but the mean difference of ~£3 per infant is small given the higher return.

conclusionsAn unconditional incentive in advance led to a significantly higher response rate compared to the promise of an incentive on completion. Against a backdrop of falling response rates to questionnaires, incentives can be an effective way to increase returns.

trial registrationSIFT ( ISRCTN76463425 ). Registered on March 5, 2013.; SWAT registration (SWAT 69 available from http://www.qub.ac.uk/sites/TheNorthernIrelandNetworkforTrialsMethodologyResearch/FileStore/Filetoupload,864297,en.pdf ). Registered on June 27, 2016.

Indexed as

MotivationResearch DesignFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornParentsParturitionPregnancySurveys and QuestionnairesEffectiveIncentiveQuestionnaireResponseUnconditional

Identifiers

PMID34419121
PMCPMC8379785
OpenAlexW3194530176

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.