ArticleNew directions for evaluation2022
Describing engagement practices for the Enhance Diversity Study using principles of Tailored Panel Management.
Article in New directions for evaluation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- A validation study of mentees' views of mentors' cultural diversity awareness behaviors (CDA race/ethnicity behaviors scale).Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Psychometric Properties of the Science Self-Efficacy Scale for STEMM Undergraduates.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2025Article
- Examining Undergraduates' Intentions to Pursue a Science Career: A Longitudinal Study of a National Biomedical Training Initiative.Education sciences · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The purpose of this chapter is to examine engagement strategies used in a large, multisite evaluation study through the lens of Estrada, Woodcock, and Schultz's (2014) tailored panel management. The evaluation, called the Enhance Diversity Study (EDS), is part of an effort funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to increase diversity in NIH-funded research. The chapter discusses engagement with a large national cohort of student participants and outlines survey administration complexities, tailored engagement approaches, and annual survey response trends. It shows how the EDS expanded Estrada and colleagues' concepts of credibility by integrating branding strategies that permeated all aspects of the study. The resulting practices, as modified over time, extend knowledge of how to increase survey response rates across a multisite, multiprogram, longitudinal evaluation. As data collection continues, subsequent analysis may provide more clarity on the impact of these strategies on retention. Future researchers should explore the impacts of incorporating fully developed branding strategies to enhance study commitment and cohort retention. While past research has guided surveys through phone, mail, and multimodal distribution, more research is needed to understand how to engage participants and retain them in an increasingly competitive and digital world.
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.