Trial reportTrials2023
The detection and management of attempted fraud during an online randomised trial.
Trial report in Trials, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of alcohol strength on attitudes and decisions concerning special occasion drinking during pregnancy.BMC public health · 2025Trial
- Lessons Learned Identifying and Controlling Fraudulent Participation in Online Randomized Trials.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Imposters, Bots, and Other Threats to Data Integrity in Online Research: Scoping Review of the Literature and Recommendations for Best Practices.Online journal of public health informatics · 2025Review
- Striking a Balance: Mitigating Fraud While Ensuring Equity in Online Qualitative Research Recruitment.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Identifying and counteracting fraudulent responses in online recruitment for health research: a scoping review.BMJ evidence-based medicine · 2025Article
- Assessment of Fraud Deterrence and Detection Procedures Used in a Web-Based Survey Study With Adult Black Cisgender Women: Description of Lessons Learned and Recommendations.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Advancing translational science through trial integrity: REDCap-based approaches to mitigating fraud and bias.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025Article
- A Microfinance Intervention With or Without Peer Support to Improve Mental Health Among Transgender and Nonbinary Adults (the Creating Access to Resources and Economic Support Study): Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2024Article
- Navigating the challenges of imposter participants in online qualitative research: lessons learned from a paediatric health services study.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOnline studies offer an efficient method of recruiting participants and collecting data. Whilst delivering an online randomised trial, we detected unusual recruitment activity. We describe our approach to detecting and managing suspected fraud and share lessons for researchers.
methodsOur trial investigated the single and combined effects of different ways of presenting clinical audit and feedback. Clinicians and managers who received feedback from one of five United Kingdom national clinical audit programmes were emailed invitations that contained a link to the trial website. After providing consent and selecting their relevant audit, participants were randomised automatically to different feedback versions. Immediately after viewing their assigned feedback, participants completed a questionnaire and could request a financial voucher by entering an email address. Email addresses were not linked to trial data to preserve participant anonymity. We actively monitored participant numbers, questionnaire completions, and voucher claims.
resultsFollowing a rapid increase in trial participation, we identified 268 new voucher claims from three email addresses that we had reason to believe were linked. Further scrutiny revealed duplicate trial completions and voucher requests from 24 email addresses. We immediately suspended the trial, improved security measures, and went on to successfully complete the study. We found a peak in questionnaires completed in less than 20 seconds during a likely contamination period. Given that study and personal data were not linked, we could not directly identify the trial data from the 268 duplicate entries within the 603 randomisations occurring during the same period. We therefore excluded all 603 randomisations from the primary analysis, which was consequently based on 638 randomisations. A sensitivity analysis, including all 961 randomisations over the entire study except for questionnaire completions of less than 20 seconds, found only minor differences from the primary analysis.
conclusionOnline studies offering incentives for participation are at risk of attempted fraud. Systematic monitoring and analysis can help detect such activity. Measures to protect study integrity include linking participant identifiers to study data, balancing study security and ease of participation, and safeguarding the allocation of participant incentives.
trial registrationInternational Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number: ISRCTN41584028. Registration date is August 17, 2017.
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.