ArticleNursing research
A Comparative Analysis of Recruitment Methods to Reach Emerging Adults Outside the Clinical Setting.
Article in Nursing research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Comparison of Participant Demographics Across Co-Designed Recruitment Methods to Two Student Mental Health Trials: Cross-Sectional Observational Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Observational
- Digital and traditional recruitment strategies and participation patterns in the multicenter Healthy Brain Ageing study.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEmerging adults are a hard-to-recruit population for health researchers, as many do not routinely access healthcare services and are best recruited outside clinical settings. Social media and research volunteer registries (e.g., ResearchMatch) offer great potential among this population, yet a comparison of these two recruitment methods has not been done.
objectivesThe aim of this study was to compare participant enrollment and completion rates, participant demographics, and recruitment costs between recruitment methods (social media advertisements compared to ResearchMatch) deployed with a sample of emerging adults assigned female at birth.
methodsParticipants were recruited from October to November 2022 via ResearchMatch and social media (Instagram and Snapchat) advertisements. This analysis involves a subset of recruitment data from a larger institutional review board-approved study. Enrollment and survey completion rates were calculated using the number of individuals contacted and survey completion data from Qualtrics. Chi-square and independent t -test analyses were used to compare demographic data. Advertisement data collected included total cost, cost per click, link clicks, and paid impressions.
resultsTwo hundred forty-five emerging adults completed the survey, and 24 completed follow-up interviews. ResearchMatch and social media enrollment rates differed (58% and 39%, respectively). Survey completion rates for both methods were the same (~93%). Participants' ages and levels of education were significantly different. Social media resulted in recruitment of younger participants (18-21 years old), and ResearchMatch garnered participants with a higher level of education. Differences in race were also significant, as social media recruited higher numbers of White participants. Lastly, the researcher-incurred cost per survey was $0 for ResearchMatch versus $13 for social media. DISCUSSION: Although social media and ResearchMatch are both successful tools for research recruitment, each provides distinct benefits for recruiting specific populations. ResearchMatch offers a lower-cost option and access to an older emerging adult population with higher education, whereas social media provides access to a younger emerging adult population. This knowledge can be imperative for deciding which recruitment methods best fit research study needs. Future research should explore differences in race by recruitment method to highlight potential sampling biases or recruitment opportunities.
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.