Trial reportJournal of racial and ethnic health disparities2026
Randomized Recruitment Trial: Analyzing Differences in Survey Response Rates and Email Campaigns for Recruiting Latinos.
Trial report in Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIn the USA, the Hispanic/Latino population is the largest minority racial/ethnic group; yet, data have shown that they are underrepresented in trials. We conducted an experiment to assess the effect on response rate and cost of three email formats to engage Hispanic/Latino patients.
methodsPatients were randomly allocated to either Arm 1 ("Survey Research Center (SRC) Plain"), which was a plain email script with text only; Arm 2 ("SRC Formatted"), which included photos of Latino individuals; or Arm 3 ("Vendor Formatted"), which had a visual layout like Arm 2, but the email distribution was routed through a third-party's software. The overall response rate (RR1) was defined as the number of respondents who engaged with the survey (partial or complete response). The completed response rate (RR2) is the number of complete responses compared to patients invited to complete the survey. RR1 and RR2 were compared between arms using the Chi-Sq test. Analyses were performed in SAS v9.4 (SAS Institute; Cary, North Carolina).
resultsIn total, 89,778 participants were emailed. The mean age of respondents was 54.2 years (SD 14.5 years), and most respondents, 65.7%, were female, with no significant differences across all three arms. The overall response rate (RR1) for all 89,778 individuals was 2.3% (2004 responses). The overall completion rate was not significantly different across the three arms (69.6%, 66.9%, 68.4%, respectively, p = 0.589). Actual costs for implementing the three arms are proprietary. Using Arm 1 (Plain Text) as the reference, Arm 2 (SRC Formatted) costs were 1.5 times higher than Arm 1, and Arm 3 (Vendor formatted) costs were 30 times higher than Arm 1.
conclusionsAlthough the costs differed substantially between Arms 1, 2, and 3 in this study, we found no statistically significant differences in response rate between arms amongst English and Spanish speakers. These findings suggest that investigators should avoid spending additional resources on email campaigns incorporating images or outsourcing to third-party vendors when contacting Hispanics/Latinos in English or Spanish for research-related studies and focus on other ways to help foster engagement amongst this population, including incorporating community partners and incorporating Hispanic/Latino cultural values.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40447968What 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.