SynthesisTrials2026
SWAT 119: the effectiveness of a Thank You card to improve trial follow-up; a randomised study within a trial (SWAT).
Synthesis in Trials, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRetention in randomised controlled trials is crucial to maximising study power and generalisability. A Study Within A Trial (SWAT) evaluated if sending a Thank You card improved 6-month questionnaire return rates in the SWHSI-2 trial.
methodsA two-arm SWAT, using 1:1 (intervention:control) allocation, embedded within the SWHSI-2 trial. The primary outcome was the difference in the return rate of the 6-month questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were the difference in return rate of the 12-month questionnaire, questionnaire completeness, need for a reminder, and cost. The primary analysis was conducted using mixed-effects logistic regression adjusted for main trial allocation as a fixed effect and site as a random effect. Random-effects meta-analysis combined all available data for this intervention.
resultsA total of 560 participants were included in the SWAT. There was no difference in the 6-month questionnaire return rate between the Thank You card group and the no Thank You card group (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.50, p = 0.87). The 12-month retention rate was slightly higher in the Thank You card group, but the difference was not statistically significant (OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.62, p = 0.43). Findings were very similar in sensitivity analyses accounting for intervention participants who did not receive their card. There was no evidence of difference for any of the remaining secondary outcomes. Meta-analysis of the 12-month return rate suggests that Thank You cards may provide slight improvements in questionnaire response rates; however there is uncertainty in this estimate (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.45).
conclusionIt remains unclear if a Thank You card increased the rate of 6-month follow-up questionnaire completion in the SWHSI-2 trial. This is further amplified by the limited number of SWAT replications completed to date and included in the meta-analysis (n=2). The SWATs to date have primarily been undertaken in trials with a predominantly older, white, male, population. Further SWAT replications are therefore required in other populations to ensure generalisability of a cumulative SWAT finding.
trial registrationHost Trial: ISRCTN26277546. Prospectively registered on 25
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.