Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36701347›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Assessing targeted invitation and response modes to improve survey participation in a diverse New York City panel: Healthy NYC.

Shabitri Dasgupta, Sharon E Perlman, Amber Levanon Seligson, Sarah E Dumas, Kacie Seil, Tashema Bholanath

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Shabitri DasguptaDivision of Epidemiology, New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Long Island City, NY, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-6121-7508
Sharon E PerlmanDivision of Epidemiology, New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Long Island City, NY, United States of America.
Amber Levanon SeligsonDivision of Epidemiology, New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Long Island City, NY, United States of America.
Sarah E DumasDivision of Epidemiology, New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Long Island City, NY, United States of America.
Kacie SeilDivision of Epidemiology, New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Long Island City, NY, United States of America.
Tashema BholanathDivision of Epidemiology, New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Long Island City, NY, United States of America.
New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealthy NYC is an innovative survey panel created by the New York City (NYC) Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DOHMH) that offers a cost-effective mechanism for collecting priority and timely health information. Between November 2020 and June 2021, invitations for six different surveys were sent to Healthy NYC panelists by postal mail, email, and text messages. Panelists had the option to complete surveys online or via paper survey.

methodsWe analyzed whether panelists varied by sociodemographic characteristics based on the contact mode they provided and the type of invitation that led to their response using logistic regression models. Poisson regression models were used to determine whether the number of invitations received before participating in a survey was associated with sociodemographic characteristics.

resultsYounger age and higher education were positively associated with providing an email or text contact. Furthermore, age, race, and income were significant predictors for invitation modes that led to a survey response. Black panelists had 72% greater odds (OR 1.72 95% CI: 1.11-2.68) of responding to a mail invite and 33% lesser odds (OR 0.67, 95% CI: 0.54-0.83) of responding to an email invite compared with White panelists. Additionally, in five of the six surveys, more than half of the respondents completed surveys after two invites. Email invitations garnered the highest participation rates.

conclusionsWe recommend using targeted invitation modes as an additional strategy to improve participation in panels. For lower-income panelists who do not provide an email address, it may be reasonable to offer additional response options that do not require internet access. Our study's findings provide insight into how panels can tailor outreach to panelists, especially among underrepresented groups, in the most economical and efficient ways.

Indexed as

Health StatusIncomeElectronic MailInternetNew York CitySurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID36701347
PMCPMC9879422
OpenAlexW4318169385

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.