ArticleResearch in nursing & health2025
Addressing Survey Fraud in Online Health Research: A Case Study of Latine Sexual Minority Men.
Article in Research in nursing & health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Participants using GenAI in online studies: an overview and recommendations for researchers and reviewers.Research integrity and peer review · 2026Article
- Enhancing Data Integrity in Online Health Surveys Through Multilayered Security Measures: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Practical Fraud Detection and Prevention in Incentivized Online Surveys: Secondary Analysis of the ADOPT Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Procedures to Verify Legitimacy and Uniqueness of Responses in an Online Study with U.S. Young Gay and Bisexual Men Who Use Stimulants.AIDS and behavior · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Online survey research has become an increasingly popular and effective method in the social sciences for exploring and addressing health-related issues. However, the increasing prevalence of fraudulent activities, particularly survey bots, threatens data integrity and can compromise health research by generating misleading data. The purpose of this paper was to describe the implementation of bot detection strategies in an online survey with Latine sexual minority men (SMM). Eleven bot detection indicators, including AI-detection software for open-ended responses, were used in two approaches to differentiate bot-generated from human responses. In the first approach, bot detection indicators were applied stepwise to identify valid entries. In the second approach, a fraud detection algorithm was used to identify three fraud categories. Key demographics and study variables were compared across fraud categories using chi-square/Fisher's Exact tests for categorical data and Kruskal-Wallis tests for continuous data (significance set at 0.05). Of the 1147 total survey entries, 837 (73%) completed at least 20% of the survey (814 completed all items). A total of 739 (88%) of the 837 completed surveys were classified as fraudulent. Among the 837 completed surveys, 333 (40%) had an AI-generated open-ended response and fast completion time (≤ 20 min) and 234 (28%) entries were flagged for all three of these indicators. Sociodemographic characteristics and HIV prevention outcomes were largely similar across bot-generated and human responses. Findings suggest that survey bots are a pervasive threat to online research and are effective at providing human-like responses. To protect data integrity and ensure the development of effective health policies and interventions, health science researchers should adopt comprehensive bot detection and prevention strategies.
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.