ArticleQualitative health research2026
Fraudulent Participation in Online Qualitative Studies: Practical Recommendations on an Emerging Phenomenon.
Article in Qualitative health research, 2026. 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.
- Detecting and Preventing Fraudulent Participation in Qualitative Research: Content Analysis of Two Multisite Studies.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Facilitators, barriers, and strategies for optimizing engagement in recovery community centers among sexual minority people in the U.S. Northeast.Drug and alcohol dependence reports · 2026Article
- How Australia's social media minimum age law may reshape research recruitment for adolescents under 16.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2026Review
- Recruitment Strategies to Prevent Fraudulent Virtual Enrollment While Respecting Privacy in Vulnerable Populations.Qualitative health research · 2025Article
- Pragmatic and ethical challenges in navigating inauthentic participation in remote qualitative research.Research ethics · 2025Article
- I have been scammed in my qualitative research.Research integrity and peer review · 2025Article
- Striking a Balance: Mitigating Fraud While Ensuring Equity in Online Qualitative Research Recruitment.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Article
- Online Hearing Voices Peer Support Groups: Assessing Feasibility and Acceptability Within UK National Health Service Settings.Schizophrenia bulletin open · 2025Article
- Recommendations for conducting qualitative research on multiple long-term conditions (MLTC) from a qualitative methods community of practice.Journal of multimorbidity and comorbidityArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fraudulent participation is defined in the following as participation in research by individuals who, for one reason or another, intentionally provide false responses. Qualitative studies are at an increased risk of fraudulent participation when online recruitment and participation are used, and monetary incentives offered. Fraudulent participation threatens data quality and subsequent evidence-based practice, yet validated guidance on how to tackle it is lacking. This paper offers a critical reflection thereon by three separate qualitative research groups that experienced fraudulent participation in collaboration with a patient representative, a bioethicist, a legal expert, a journal deputy editor, and a chief executive of a national charity. The Prevent FRaudulent Online STudy participation (P-FROST) recommendations provide advice on (1) Study set-up (including team members and study design), (2) Monetary incentives and recruitment, (3) Data collection (screening and interview considerations), and (4) Analysis, reporting, and support. The reflection which balances the diverse perspectives of patients, researchers, funders, ethics boards, and legal teams puts forward the P-FROST recommendations to identify and prevent fraudulent participation throughout the design, ethical approval, and implementation of online qualitative research.
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.