ArticleBMC medical research methodology2022
Applying the 4Ps of social marketing to retain and engage participants in longitudinal cohort studies: generation 2 Raine study participant perspectives.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Assessing the integration of social marketing principles in ivory demand management interventions in China and Southeast Asia.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026Review
- Participant Retention in a Prospective Multicenter Cohort of Participants With Pancreatitis and Factors Associated With Attrition.Pancreas · 2026Article
- Feasibility and acceptability of conducting a birth cohort study during the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed-methods study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- Long-Term Engagement of Diverse Study Cohorts in Decentralized Research: Longitudinal Analysis of "All of Us" Research Program Data.Interactive journal of medical research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInvestigations of participant retention in longitudinal health and medical research, document strategies that work best but overlook social marketing's capacity to influence participant retention. After applying the social marketing framework: the idea that determining what longitudinal participants 'buy' (product), at what cost (price), in what location (place) and through which communication channels (promotion), this paper aims to inform and enhance retention efforts.
methodsThis qualitative study was conducted through in-depth interviews with participants from the Raine Study that began in Western Australia in 1989. The Generation 2 participants, initially enrolled into the Raine Study as babies by their parents (Generation 1), are now young adults invited to attend follow-up studies and tests every few years. Our study defined 'active' participants (n = 17) as those who agreed to attend their 27 year follow-up, and 'inactive' (n = 12) participants as those who had attended neither of the past two follow-ups (22 and 27 years).
resultsRaine Study participants experienced core, actual and augmented product benefits. Inactive participants focused on the costs (price) associated with participation, and were more likely to suggest tele-health (place) strategies to overcome barriers to follow-up attendance. Both active and inactive participants found professional processes and friendly staff made the Raine Study environment appealing, suggested that social media (promotion) was underutilised, and offered novel ideas to enhance engagement.
conclusionsSocial marketing can support the development of differentiated strategies addressing the unique needs and wants of active and inactive participants. Sophisticated cohort segmentation can reach participants in a more meaningful way, reinforce the study 'brand' and guard against attrition.
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.