ArticleField methods2024
What predicts willingness to participate in a follow-up panel study among respondents to a national web/mail survey?
Article in Field methods, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The American Family Health Study (AFHS) collected family health and fertility data from a national probability sample of persons aged 18-49 between September 2021 and May 2022, using web and mail exclusively. In July 2022, we surveyed AFHS respondents and gauged their willingness to become part of a national web panel that would create novel longitudinal data on these topics. We focus on predictors of willingness to participate, identifying the potential selection bias that this type of approach may introduce. We found that efforts of this type to create a national web panel may introduce potential selection bias in estimates based on the panel respondents, with individuals having higher socio-economic status being more cooperative. Thus, alternative recruitment strategies and re-weighting of the subsample may be needed to further reduce selection bias. We present methodological implications of our results, limitations of our approach, and suggestions for further research on this topic.
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.