Cargando…

Participant recruitment in sensitive surveys: a comparative trial of ‘opt in’ versus ‘opt out’ approaches

BACKGROUND: Although in health services survey research we strive for a high response rate, this must be balanced against the need to recruit participants ethically and considerately, particularly in surveys with a sensitive nature. In survey research there are no established recommendations to guid...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hunt, Katherine J, Shlomo, Natalie, Addington-Hall, Julia
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3566917/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23311340
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-13-3
_version_ 1782258622362812416
author Hunt, Katherine J
Shlomo, Natalie
Addington-Hall, Julia
author_facet Hunt, Katherine J
Shlomo, Natalie
Addington-Hall, Julia
author_sort Hunt, Katherine J
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Although in health services survey research we strive for a high response rate, this must be balanced against the need to recruit participants ethically and considerately, particularly in surveys with a sensitive nature. In survey research there are no established recommendations to guide recruitment approach and an ‘opt-in’ system that requires potential participants to request a copy of the questionnaire by returning a reply slip is frequently adopted. However, in observational research the risk to participants is lower than in clinical research and so some surveys have used an ‘opt-out’ system. The effect of this approach on response and distress is unknown. We sought to investigate this in a survey of end of life care completed by bereaved relatives. METHODS: Out of a sample of 1422 bereaved relatives we assigned potential participants to one of two study groups: an ‘opt in’ group (n=711) where a letter of invitation was issued with a reply slip to request a copy of the questionnaire; or an ‘opt out’ group (n=711) where the survey questionnaire was provided alongside the invitation letter. We assessed response and distress between groups. RESULTS: From a sample of 1422, 473 participants returned questionnaires. Response was higher in the ‘opt out’ group than in the ‘opt in’ group (40% compared to 26.4%: χ(2) =29.79, p-value<.01), there were no differences in distress or complaints about the survey between groups, and assignment to the ‘opt out’ group was an independent predictor of response (OR=1.84, 95% CI: 1.45-2.34). Moreover, the ‘opt in’ group were more likely to decline to participate (χ(2)=28.60, p-value<.01) and there was a difference in the pattern of questionnaire responses between study groups. CONCLUSION: Given that the ‘opt out’ method of recruitment is associated with a higher response than the ‘opt in’ method, seems to have no impact on complaints or distress about the survey, and there are differences in the patterns of responses between groups, the ‘opt out’ method could be recommended as the most efficient way to recruit into surveys, even in those with a sensitive nature.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3566917
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-35669172013-02-11 Participant recruitment in sensitive surveys: a comparative trial of ‘opt in’ versus ‘opt out’ approaches Hunt, Katherine J Shlomo, Natalie Addington-Hall, Julia BMC Med Res Methodol Research Article BACKGROUND: Although in health services survey research we strive for a high response rate, this must be balanced against the need to recruit participants ethically and considerately, particularly in surveys with a sensitive nature. In survey research there are no established recommendations to guide recruitment approach and an ‘opt-in’ system that requires potential participants to request a copy of the questionnaire by returning a reply slip is frequently adopted. However, in observational research the risk to participants is lower than in clinical research and so some surveys have used an ‘opt-out’ system. The effect of this approach on response and distress is unknown. We sought to investigate this in a survey of end of life care completed by bereaved relatives. METHODS: Out of a sample of 1422 bereaved relatives we assigned potential participants to one of two study groups: an ‘opt in’ group (n=711) where a letter of invitation was issued with a reply slip to request a copy of the questionnaire; or an ‘opt out’ group (n=711) where the survey questionnaire was provided alongside the invitation letter. We assessed response and distress between groups. RESULTS: From a sample of 1422, 473 participants returned questionnaires. Response was higher in the ‘opt out’ group than in the ‘opt in’ group (40% compared to 26.4%: χ(2) =29.79, p-value<.01), there were no differences in distress or complaints about the survey between groups, and assignment to the ‘opt out’ group was an independent predictor of response (OR=1.84, 95% CI: 1.45-2.34). Moreover, the ‘opt in’ group were more likely to decline to participate (χ(2)=28.60, p-value<.01) and there was a difference in the pattern of questionnaire responses between study groups. CONCLUSION: Given that the ‘opt out’ method of recruitment is associated with a higher response than the ‘opt in’ method, seems to have no impact on complaints or distress about the survey, and there are differences in the patterns of responses between groups, the ‘opt out’ method could be recommended as the most efficient way to recruit into surveys, even in those with a sensitive nature. BioMed Central 2013-01-11 /pmc/articles/PMC3566917/ /pubmed/23311340 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-13-3 Text en Copyright ©2013 Hunt et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Hunt, Katherine J
Shlomo, Natalie
Addington-Hall, Julia
Participant recruitment in sensitive surveys: a comparative trial of ‘opt in’ versus ‘opt out’ approaches
title Participant recruitment in sensitive surveys: a comparative trial of ‘opt in’ versus ‘opt out’ approaches
title_full Participant recruitment in sensitive surveys: a comparative trial of ‘opt in’ versus ‘opt out’ approaches
title_fullStr Participant recruitment in sensitive surveys: a comparative trial of ‘opt in’ versus ‘opt out’ approaches
title_full_unstemmed Participant recruitment in sensitive surveys: a comparative trial of ‘opt in’ versus ‘opt out’ approaches
title_short Participant recruitment in sensitive surveys: a comparative trial of ‘opt in’ versus ‘opt out’ approaches
title_sort participant recruitment in sensitive surveys: a comparative trial of ‘opt in’ versus ‘opt out’ approaches
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3566917/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23311340
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-13-3
work_keys_str_mv AT huntkatherinej participantrecruitmentinsensitivesurveysacomparativetrialofoptinversusoptoutapproaches
AT shlomonatalie participantrecruitmentinsensitivesurveysacomparativetrialofoptinversusoptoutapproaches
AT addingtonhalljulia participantrecruitmentinsensitivesurveysacomparativetrialofoptinversusoptoutapproaches