ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2023
"And then I found $5": Optimizing recruitment efficiency in remote clinical trials.
Article in Journal of clinical and translational science, 2023. 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.
- Evaluation of Dual Use: Real Time Reductions in Combustible Cigarette Smoking During Co-Occurring Use of E-Cigarettes.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2025Trial
- The prospective relationship between a-priori intentions for and patterns of e-cigarette use among adults who smoke cigarettes.Addictive behaviors · 2024Trial
- Virtual Data Collection Strategies in Research on Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias (ADRD).Innovation in aging · 2025Article
- Progress toward realizing the promise of decentralized clinical trials.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2024Article
- Effect of unguided e-cigarette provision on uptake, use, and smoking cessation among adults who smoke in the USA: a naturalistic, randomised, controlled clinical trial.EClinicalMedicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: As clinical trials adopt remote methodologies, there is need to optimize efficiency of remote enrollment. Within a remote clinical trial, we aim to (1) assess if sociodemographic factors differ among those consenting via mail vs. technology-based procedures (e-consent), (2) determine if, among those consenting via mail, a small unconditional monetary reward ($5) increases likelihood of subsequent enrollment, (3) economically evaluate additional cost per additional participant enrolled with $5 reward. Methods: In the parent nationwide randomized clinical trial of adult smokers ( Results: Older age, less education, lower income, and female sex predicted enrolling via mail vs e-consent ( Conclusions: As e-consent methods become more common, they have potential to reach many individuals but with perhaps diminished inclusion across all sociodemographic groups. Provision of an unconditional monetary incentive is possibly a cost-effective mechanism to increase recruitment efficiency for studies employing mail-based consenting procedures.
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.