Cargando…

Improving participation rates by providing choice of participation mode: two randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND: Low participation rates reduce effective sample size, statistical power and can increase risk for selection bias. Previous research suggests that offering choice of participation mode can improve participation rates. However, few head-to-head trials compared choice of participation mode...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Heijmans, Naomi, van Lieshout, Jan, Wensing, Michel
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4392857/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25886757
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-015-0021-2
_version_ 1782366056155709440
author Heijmans, Naomi
van Lieshout, Jan
Wensing, Michel
author_facet Heijmans, Naomi
van Lieshout, Jan
Wensing, Michel
author_sort Heijmans, Naomi
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Low participation rates reduce effective sample size, statistical power and can increase risk for selection bias. Previous research suggests that offering choice of participation mode can improve participation rates. However, few head-to-head trials compared choice of participation mode using telephone interviews and postal questionnaires as modes of interest. Aiming to explore effects of choice of participation, two randomized controlled trials were performed comparing participation rates of patients provided with and without choice of participation mode, using interviews and questionnaires as participation modes. METHODS: Two trials were embedded in a larger study on cardiovascular risk management in primary care. Patients with a chronic cardiovascular condition recruited for the larger study were invited to participate in an additional survey on social networks, using invitations with and without choice of participation mode. Primary outcome was participation rate. Other outcomes of interest were participation rate conditional on willingness to participate, and initial willingness to participate. In trial 1 we compared outcomes after choice of participation mode (interview or questionnaire) with invitations for participation in a telephone interview. In Trial 2 results for choice of participation mode were compared with postal questionnaires. RESULTS: In Trial 1 no differences were found in participation rates (65% vs 66%, p = 0.853) although conditional participation rate was highest for interviews (90% vs 72%, p < .01). Initial willingness to participate was higher when choice of participation mode was provided (90% versus 73%, p < .01). In Trial 2 participation rate and conditional participation rate was higher when choice of participation mode was provided (59% vs 46%, p < .01 and 66% vs 53%, p < .01, respectively). No differences were found for initial willingness to participate (90% vs 86%, p = 0.146). CONCLUSION: Offering choice of participation mode had benefit on participation rates compared to invitations to participate in questionnaires, but not when compared to invitations to participate in telephone interviews. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN89237105.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4392857
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43928572015-04-11 Improving participation rates by providing choice of participation mode: two randomized controlled trials Heijmans, Naomi van Lieshout, Jan Wensing, Michel BMC Med Res Methodol Research Article BACKGROUND: Low participation rates reduce effective sample size, statistical power and can increase risk for selection bias. Previous research suggests that offering choice of participation mode can improve participation rates. However, few head-to-head trials compared choice of participation mode using telephone interviews and postal questionnaires as modes of interest. Aiming to explore effects of choice of participation, two randomized controlled trials were performed comparing participation rates of patients provided with and without choice of participation mode, using interviews and questionnaires as participation modes. METHODS: Two trials were embedded in a larger study on cardiovascular risk management in primary care. Patients with a chronic cardiovascular condition recruited for the larger study were invited to participate in an additional survey on social networks, using invitations with and without choice of participation mode. Primary outcome was participation rate. Other outcomes of interest were participation rate conditional on willingness to participate, and initial willingness to participate. In trial 1 we compared outcomes after choice of participation mode (interview or questionnaire) with invitations for participation in a telephone interview. In Trial 2 results for choice of participation mode were compared with postal questionnaires. RESULTS: In Trial 1 no differences were found in participation rates (65% vs 66%, p = 0.853) although conditional participation rate was highest for interviews (90% vs 72%, p < .01). Initial willingness to participate was higher when choice of participation mode was provided (90% versus 73%, p < .01). In Trial 2 participation rate and conditional participation rate was higher when choice of participation mode was provided (59% vs 46%, p < .01 and 66% vs 53%, p < .01, respectively). No differences were found for initial willingness to participate (90% vs 86%, p = 0.146). CONCLUSION: Offering choice of participation mode had benefit on participation rates compared to invitations to participate in questionnaires, but not when compared to invitations to participate in telephone interviews. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN89237105. BioMed Central 2015-04-02 /pmc/articles/PMC4392857/ /pubmed/25886757 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-015-0021-2 Text en © Heijmans et al.; licensee BioMed Cental. 2015 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Heijmans, Naomi
van Lieshout, Jan
Wensing, Michel
Improving participation rates by providing choice of participation mode: two randomized controlled trials
title Improving participation rates by providing choice of participation mode: two randomized controlled trials
title_full Improving participation rates by providing choice of participation mode: two randomized controlled trials
title_fullStr Improving participation rates by providing choice of participation mode: two randomized controlled trials
title_full_unstemmed Improving participation rates by providing choice of participation mode: two randomized controlled trials
title_short Improving participation rates by providing choice of participation mode: two randomized controlled trials
title_sort improving participation rates by providing choice of participation mode: two randomized controlled trials
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4392857/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25886757
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-015-0021-2
work_keys_str_mv AT heijmansnaomi improvingparticipationratesbyprovidingchoiceofparticipationmodetworandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT vanlieshoutjan improvingparticipationratesbyprovidingchoiceofparticipationmodetworandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT wensingmichel improvingparticipationratesbyprovidingchoiceofparticipationmodetworandomizedcontrolledtrials