ArticleFrontiers in digital health2026
Recruitment strategies and participant motivations in a digital randomized controlled trial for the prevention of anxiety disorders: the prevANS study.
Article in Frontiers in digital health, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Anxiety disorders are among the most prevalent mental health problems worldwide, and access to effective treatment is not always available. Preventive interventions need to be scalable and cost-effective, which can be achieved through communication and information technologies. However, recruiting participants for digital prevention trials remains a major methodological challenge. Aim: To evaluate the performance of different approaches to recruiting participants for a digital preventive intervention for anxiety (the prevANS trial), and to assess participants' motivations for enrolling in the trial. Methods: Descriptive analyses were conducted to evaluate the performance of each recruitment strategy (number of potential participants attracted per week). Quantitative data were obtained from website records of individuals initiating the online screening process while each strategy was active, and self-reported information on how participants learned about the study. Baseline group differences between the intervention and control groups were examined using chi-square and Mann-Whitney Results: Over a 26-month recruitment period, 6,017 individuals initiated screening and 1,054 participants were enrolled (17.5% conversion rate). The most effective strategies for attracting potential participants were social media and university dissemination. Self-reported data also indicated that word of mouth had a notable impact on recruitment. The final sample was mainly composed of women and highly educated participants, and the intervention and control groups were balanced across all variables except for age. Thematic analysis revealed three main motivations for enrollment: helping others, health related issues, and own benefits. Conclusion: Recruitment strategies should be tailored to the target population, as their performance may vary across groups. Involving users through co-design and co-creation can enhance both the intervention and the identification of effective recruitment channels in digital trials.
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.