Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38133910›Full record

Trial reportJournal of medical Internet research2023

Email-Based Recruitment Into the Health eHeart Study: Cohort Analysis of Invited Eligible Patients.

Madelena Y Ng, Jeffrey E Olgin, Gregory M Marcus, Courtney R Lyles, Mark J Pletcher

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of medical Internet research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Comfort, benefit, and distress: An exploratory study of research experiences of bereaved parents in the neonatal intensive care unit.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Madelena Y NgSchool of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-3824-9349
Jeffrey E OlginDepartment of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-1684-9327
Gregory M MarcusDepartment of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-5197-7696
Courtney R Lyles *School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-1111-8595
Mark J Pletcher *Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-6966-1312
University of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWeb- or app-based digital health studies allow for more efficient collection of health data for research. However, remote recruitment into digital health studies can enroll nonrepresentative study samples, hindering the robustness and generalizability of findings. Through the comprehensive evaluation of an email-based campaign on recruitment into the Health eHeart Study, we aim to uncover key sociodemographic and clinical factors that contribute to enrollment.

objectiveThis study sought to understand the factors related to participation, specifically regarding enrollment, in the Health eHeart Study as a result of a large-scale remote email recruitment campaign.

methodsWe conducted a cohort analysis on all invited University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) patients to identify sociodemographic and clinical predictors of enrollment into the Health eHeart Study. The primary outcome was enrollment, defined by account registration and consent into the Health eHeart Study. The email recruitment campaign was carried out from August 2015 to February 2016, with electronic health record data extracted between September 2019 and December 2019.

resultsThe email recruitment campaign delivered at least 1 email invitation to 93.5% (193,606/206,983) of all invited patients and yielded a 3.6% (7012/193,606) registration rate among contacted patients and an 84.1% (5899/7012) consent rate among registered patients. Adjusted multivariate logistic regression models analyzed independent sociodemographic and clinical predictors of (1) registration among contacted participants and (2) consent among registered participants. Odds of registration were higher among patients who are older, women, non-Hispanic White, active patients with commercial insurance or Medicare, with a higher comorbidity burden, with congestive heart failure, and randomized to receive up to 2 recruitment emails. The odds of registration were lower among those with medical conditions such as dementia, chronic pulmonary disease, moderate or severe liver disease, paraplegia or hemiplegia, renal disease, or cancer. Odds of subsequent consent after initial registration were different, with an inverse trend of being lower among patients who are older and women. The odds of consent were also lower among those with peripheral vascular disease. However, the odds of consent remained higher among patients who were non-Hispanic White and those with commercial insurance.

conclusionsThis study provides important insights into the potential returns on participant enrollment when digital health study teams invest resources in using email for recruitment. The findings show that participant enrollment was driven more strongly by sociodemographic factors than clinical factors. Overall, email is an extremely efficient means of recruiting participants from a large list into the Health eHeart Study. Despite some improvements in representation, the formulation of truly diverse studies will require additional resources and strategies to overcome persistent participation barriers.

Indexed as

Electronic MailMedicareAgedCohort StudiesData CollectionFemaleHumansPatient SelectionUnited Statesadvertisementcampaign evaluationconsentdigital health studyeHealthemailengagementenrollmentparticipationrecruitmentregistrationresearch participants

Identifiers

PMID38133910
PMCPMC10770794
OpenAlexW4389168630

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.