Cargando…

A study update newsletter or Post-it® note did not increase postal questionnaire response rates in a falls prevention trial: an embedded randomised factorial trial

Background: Participants not returning data collection questionnaires is a problem for many randomised controlled trials. The resultant loss of data leads to a reduction in statistical power and can result in bias. The aim of this study was to assess whether the use of a study update newsletter and/...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rodgers, Sara, Sbizzera, Illary, Cockayne, Sarah, Fairhurst, Caroline, Lamb, Sarah E., Vernon, Wesley, Watson, Judith, Hewitt, Catherine, Torgerson, David
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: F1000 Research Limited 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6402081/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30863532
http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.14591.2
_version_ 1783400312612061184
author Rodgers, Sara
Sbizzera, Illary
Cockayne, Sarah
Fairhurst, Caroline
Lamb, Sarah E.
Vernon, Wesley
Watson, Judith
Hewitt, Catherine
Torgerson, David
author_facet Rodgers, Sara
Sbizzera, Illary
Cockayne, Sarah
Fairhurst, Caroline
Lamb, Sarah E.
Vernon, Wesley
Watson, Judith
Hewitt, Catherine
Torgerson, David
author_sort Rodgers, Sara
collection PubMed
description Background: Participants not returning data collection questionnaires is a problem for many randomised controlled trials. The resultant loss of data leads to a reduction in statistical power and can result in bias. The aim of this study was to assess whether the use of a study update newsletter and/or a handwritten or printed Post-it® note sticker increased postal questionnaire response rates for participants of a randomised controlled trial. Method: This study was a factorial trial embedded within a host trial of a falls-prevention intervention among men and women aged ≥65 years under podiatric care. Participants were randomised into one of six groups: newsletter plus handwritten Post-it®; newsletter plus printed Post-it®; newsletter only; handwritten Post-it® only; printed Post-it® only; or no newsletter or Post-it®. The results were combined with those from previous embedded randomised controlled trials in meta-analyses. Results: The overall 12-month response rate was 803/826 (97.2%) (newsletter 95.1%, no newsletter 99.3%, printed Post-it® 97.5%, handwritten Post-it® 97.1%, no Post-it® 97.1%). The study update newsletter had a detrimental effect on response rates (adjusted odds ratio 0.14, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.48, p<0.01) and time to return the questionnaire (adjusted hazard ratio 0.86, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.99, p=0.04). No other statistically significant differences were observed between the intervention groups on response rates, time to response, and the need for a reminder. Conclusions: Post-it® notes have been shown to be ineffective in three embedded trials, whereas the evidence for newsletter reminders is still uncertain.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6402081
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher F1000 Research Limited
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64020812019-03-11 A study update newsletter or Post-it® note did not increase postal questionnaire response rates in a falls prevention trial: an embedded randomised factorial trial Rodgers, Sara Sbizzera, Illary Cockayne, Sarah Fairhurst, Caroline Lamb, Sarah E. Vernon, Wesley Watson, Judith Hewitt, Catherine Torgerson, David F1000Res Research Article Background: Participants not returning data collection questionnaires is a problem for many randomised controlled trials. The resultant loss of data leads to a reduction in statistical power and can result in bias. The aim of this study was to assess whether the use of a study update newsletter and/or a handwritten or printed Post-it® note sticker increased postal questionnaire response rates for participants of a randomised controlled trial. Method: This study was a factorial trial embedded within a host trial of a falls-prevention intervention among men and women aged ≥65 years under podiatric care. Participants were randomised into one of six groups: newsletter plus handwritten Post-it®; newsletter plus printed Post-it®; newsletter only; handwritten Post-it® only; printed Post-it® only; or no newsletter or Post-it®. The results were combined with those from previous embedded randomised controlled trials in meta-analyses. Results: The overall 12-month response rate was 803/826 (97.2%) (newsletter 95.1%, no newsletter 99.3%, printed Post-it® 97.5%, handwritten Post-it® 97.1%, no Post-it® 97.1%). The study update newsletter had a detrimental effect on response rates (adjusted odds ratio 0.14, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.48, p<0.01) and time to return the questionnaire (adjusted hazard ratio 0.86, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.99, p=0.04). No other statistically significant differences were observed between the intervention groups on response rates, time to response, and the need for a reminder. Conclusions: Post-it® notes have been shown to be ineffective in three embedded trials, whereas the evidence for newsletter reminders is still uncertain. F1000 Research Limited 2019-02-19 /pmc/articles/PMC6402081/ /pubmed/30863532 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.14591.2 Text en Copyright: © 2019 Rodgers S et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Rodgers, Sara
Sbizzera, Illary
Cockayne, Sarah
Fairhurst, Caroline
Lamb, Sarah E.
Vernon, Wesley
Watson, Judith
Hewitt, Catherine
Torgerson, David
A study update newsletter or Post-it® note did not increase postal questionnaire response rates in a falls prevention trial: an embedded randomised factorial trial
title A study update newsletter or Post-it® note did not increase postal questionnaire response rates in a falls prevention trial: an embedded randomised factorial trial
title_full A study update newsletter or Post-it® note did not increase postal questionnaire response rates in a falls prevention trial: an embedded randomised factorial trial
title_fullStr A study update newsletter or Post-it® note did not increase postal questionnaire response rates in a falls prevention trial: an embedded randomised factorial trial
title_full_unstemmed A study update newsletter or Post-it® note did not increase postal questionnaire response rates in a falls prevention trial: an embedded randomised factorial trial
title_short A study update newsletter or Post-it® note did not increase postal questionnaire response rates in a falls prevention trial: an embedded randomised factorial trial
title_sort study update newsletter or post-it® note did not increase postal questionnaire response rates in a falls prevention trial: an embedded randomised factorial trial
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6402081/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30863532
http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.14591.2
work_keys_str_mv AT rodgerssara astudyupdatenewsletterorpostitnotedidnotincreasepostalquestionnaireresponseratesinafallspreventiontrialanembeddedrandomisedfactorialtrial
AT sbizzeraillary astudyupdatenewsletterorpostitnotedidnotincreasepostalquestionnaireresponseratesinafallspreventiontrialanembeddedrandomisedfactorialtrial
AT cockaynesarah astudyupdatenewsletterorpostitnotedidnotincreasepostalquestionnaireresponseratesinafallspreventiontrialanembeddedrandomisedfactorialtrial
AT fairhurstcaroline astudyupdatenewsletterorpostitnotedidnotincreasepostalquestionnaireresponseratesinafallspreventiontrialanembeddedrandomisedfactorialtrial
AT lambsarahe astudyupdatenewsletterorpostitnotedidnotincreasepostalquestionnaireresponseratesinafallspreventiontrialanembeddedrandomisedfactorialtrial
AT vernonwesley astudyupdatenewsletterorpostitnotedidnotincreasepostalquestionnaireresponseratesinafallspreventiontrialanembeddedrandomisedfactorialtrial
AT watsonjudith astudyupdatenewsletterorpostitnotedidnotincreasepostalquestionnaireresponseratesinafallspreventiontrialanembeddedrandomisedfactorialtrial
AT hewittcatherine astudyupdatenewsletterorpostitnotedidnotincreasepostalquestionnaireresponseratesinafallspreventiontrialanembeddedrandomisedfactorialtrial
AT torgersondavid astudyupdatenewsletterorpostitnotedidnotincreasepostalquestionnaireresponseratesinafallspreventiontrialanembeddedrandomisedfactorialtrial
AT rodgerssara studyupdatenewsletterorpostitnotedidnotincreasepostalquestionnaireresponseratesinafallspreventiontrialanembeddedrandomisedfactorialtrial
AT sbizzeraillary studyupdatenewsletterorpostitnotedidnotincreasepostalquestionnaireresponseratesinafallspreventiontrialanembeddedrandomisedfactorialtrial
AT cockaynesarah studyupdatenewsletterorpostitnotedidnotincreasepostalquestionnaireresponseratesinafallspreventiontrialanembeddedrandomisedfactorialtrial
AT fairhurstcaroline studyupdatenewsletterorpostitnotedidnotincreasepostalquestionnaireresponseratesinafallspreventiontrialanembeddedrandomisedfactorialtrial
AT lambsarahe studyupdatenewsletterorpostitnotedidnotincreasepostalquestionnaireresponseratesinafallspreventiontrialanembeddedrandomisedfactorialtrial
AT vernonwesley studyupdatenewsletterorpostitnotedidnotincreasepostalquestionnaireresponseratesinafallspreventiontrialanembeddedrandomisedfactorialtrial
AT watsonjudith studyupdatenewsletterorpostitnotedidnotincreasepostalquestionnaireresponseratesinafallspreventiontrialanembeddedrandomisedfactorialtrial
AT hewittcatherine studyupdatenewsletterorpostitnotedidnotincreasepostalquestionnaireresponseratesinafallspreventiontrialanembeddedrandomisedfactorialtrial
AT torgersondavid studyupdatenewsletterorpostitnotedidnotincreasepostalquestionnaireresponseratesinafallspreventiontrialanembeddedrandomisedfactorialtrial