Observational studyJournal of medical Internet research2025
Effectiveness and Costs of Participant Recruitment Strategies to a Web-Based Population Cohort: Observational Study.
Observational study in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multimodal Online Recruitment and Engagement of Black Breast Cancer Survivors for Mixed Methods Social Determinants of Health Research: Feasibility Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- A Comparison of Participant Demographics Across Co-Designed Recruitment Methods to Two Student Mental Health Trials: Cross-Sectional Observational Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Observational
- Assessing the feasibility, theoretical interest, and observed behaviors of adding genetic data to a patient-reported multiple sclerosis registry.Multiple sclerosis journal - experimental, translational and clinicalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Recruitment to population-based health studies remains challenging, with difficulties meeting target participant numbers, biosample returns, and achieving a representative sample. Few studies provide evaluations of traditional and web-based recruitment methods particularly for studies with broad inclusion criteria and extended recruitment periods. Generation Scotland (GS) is a family-based cohort study that initiated a new wave of recruitment in 2022 using web-based data collection and remote saliva sampling (for genotyping). Here, we provide an overview of recruitment strategies used by GS over the first 18 months of new recruitment, highlighting which proved most effective and cost-efficient in order to inform future research. Objective: This study evaluated recruitment strategies using four main outcomes: (1) absolute recruitment numbers, (2) sociodemographic representativeness, (3) biosample return rate, and (4) cost per participant. Methods: Between May 2022 and December 2023, recruitment was undertaken via snowball recruitment (through friends and family of existing volunteers), invitations to those who participated in a previous survey (CovidLife: the GS COVID-19 impact survey), and Scotland-wide recruitment through social media (including sponsored Meta-advertisements), news media, and TV advertisement. The method of recruitment was self-reported in the baseline questionnaire. We present absolute recruitment numbers and sociodemographic characteristics by recruitment method and evaluate the saliva sample return rate by recruitment strategy using chi-square tests. The overall cost and cost per participant were calculated for each method. Results: In total, 7889 new participants joined the cohort over this period. Recruitment sources by contribution were social media (n=2436, 30.9%), survey responder invitations (n=2049, 26.0%), TV advertising (n=367, 17.3%), snowball (n=891, 11.3%), news media (n=747, 9.5%), and other methods or unknown (n=399, 5.0%). More females signed up than males (5570/7889, 70.5% female). To date, 83.5% (6543/7836) of participants returned their postal saliva sample, which also varied by demographic factors (3485/3851, 90.5% older than 60 years vs 471/662, 71.1% aged 16-34 years). Average cost per participant across all recruitment strategies was £13.52 (US $16.82). Previous survey recontacting was the most cost-effective (£0.37 [US $0.46]), followed by social media (£14.78 [US $18.39]), while TV advertisement recruitment was the most expensive per recruit (£33.67 [US $41.89]). Conclusions: This study highlights both the challenges and the opportunities in large web-based cohort recruitment. Overall, social media advertising has been the most cost-effective and easily sustained strategy for recruitment over the reported recruitment period. We note that different strategies resulted in successful recruitment over varying timescales (eg, consistent sustained recruitment for social media and large spikes for news media and TV advertising), which may be informative for future studies with different requirements of recruitment periods. Limitations include self-reported methods of recruitment and difficulties in evaluating multilayered recruitment. Overall, these data demonstrate the potential cost requirements and effectiveness of different strategies that could be applied to future research studies.
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.