The Role of Supplementary Material in Journal Articles QT
NCT ID: NCT02961036
Last Updated: 2021-03-22
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
2872 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2016-11-15
2019-02-25
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
To mitigate these challenges, incentives may be offered in the form of gift certificate draws. There is uncertainty about whether this strategy is effective in online research and if the value of the incentive alters the outcome. A randomised trial can be used to test the intervention to establish an evidence base.
This study (SupMatQT) proposes to link with a large 20,000 person international cohort study (SupMat) that will test the utility and preferences of journal supplementary materials for reviewers, authors,and readers. The research described here will examine the evidence of effect for offering a prize draw incentive on rates of recruitment, and completion for consented participants. All participants will be entered in the draw. Information about the value of the incentive of a prize draw will differ according to what group a participant is randomized to. The entry in the prize draw will not be conditional on levels of participation or group allocation.
The other question researchers will address is what effect do survey reminders have on outcomes? All non-responders will be sent an initial reminder to complete the survey (Group A) and for those who have still not responded a second reminder will be sent 14 days later (Group B). Outcomes will be compared at three time points: for initial response, following reminder 1(Group A), and following reminder 2 (Group B).
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
How Frequently and in What Format Are Research Trial Results Disseminated to Participants (ResponseQT)
NCT03021863
Protocol Lab for Online Trial Delphi and Question Effects
NCT03498677
The Effect of a Scratch Off Prompt on Health Engagement
NCT01401621
Reference Database Development for the Quotient® System iPad Test
NCT02693275
Information Provision and Consistency Framing to Increase COVID-19 Booster Uptake
NCT05586178
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Large research populations can struggle to recruit participants and to obtain complete data. This can have a direct effect on the robustness of the findings and can undermine the often substantial investment, participants, researchers, and sponsors have made in the research. This research waste may undermine public trust and community enthusiasm for the research process. It may seem logical to offer a prize-winning draw as an incentive but only a trial can give objective information about how well this intervention works. It is cost effective to embed this research at the beginning of an existing large cohort study as funding may not be available to test the intervention as a stand alone question. The additional question of interest addressed will be asking whether one survey reminder or two is more effective in terms of recruitment and survey completion rates. The question is practical as ineffective reminders use researcher resources, increase the burden of participation on the participant and could build resentment if the respondent feels "spammed" whereas the ideal balance of reminders will result in increased recruitment and survey completion rates.
Participants in this cohort are drawn from a convenience sample of BMJ Publishing Group's journals that have a spread of Impact Factors, including the BMJ. Included journals have a website and publish supplementary material.
Devoting time and resources to understand what strategies will mobilize participants to remain motivated to join a study and complete the conditions is good planning and contributes to robust methods that other researchers can replicate. To the investigators' knowledge, no similar work has been conducted solely within the online population of readers, peer reviewers and authors of an academic journal group.
The aims of the study are to test the effect of:
1. Being told you will be entered into a prize draw versus not being told on survey recruitment and completion rates across three surveys (authors, readers, reviewers)
2. Entering participants into a prize draw with different values of monetary incentives on survey recruitment and completion rates across three surveys (authors, readers, reviewers)
3. Sending two survey reminders to each of these incentive groups on survey recruitment and completion rates across three surveys (authors, readers, reviewers)
The research question(s) this research explores is, what effect does the knowledge of being entered into a prize draw have on the rates of recruitment and completion in the study and does varying the value of the incentive influence the outcomes. The study will describe how or if these rates differ between authors, reviewers, and readers. The second question is how does one v two reminders influence recruitment and completion rates.
Participants (authors, reviewers ,and readers) will be invited to take part in the study and will be randomized into one of five trial arms:
All potential participants who are non-responders will receive one reminder to complete the survey (Group A), For those who are still non-responders the initial reminder will be followed by an additional reminder 14 days later (Group B)
Group one will receive information within the invitation letter that they will be entered into a prize draw to win a 100% of an Amazon gift certificate or the currency equivalent.
Group two will receive information within the invitation letter that they will be entered into a prize draw to win a 75% of an Amazon gift certificate or the currency equivalent.
Group three will receive information within the invitation letter that they will be entered into a prize draw to win a 50% of an Amazon gift certificate or the currency equivalent.
Group four will receive information within the invitation letter that they will be entered into a prize draw to win a 25% of an Amazon gift certificate or the currency equivalent.
Group five will not receive any information about the prize draw for an Amazon gift certificate in the invitation letter.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
DOUBLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Group 1 Information
Group 1 Information about the prize draw incentive for 100% of an Amazon gift (or currency equivalent) in the invitation letter.
Group 1 information
Group 1 prize draw information for participants to win 100% of an Amazon gift card (or currency equivalent) in invitation letter.
Group 2 Information
Group 2 Information about the prize draw incentive for 75% of an Amazon gift (or currency equivalent) in the invitation letter.
Group 2 information
Group 2 prize draw information for participants to win 75% of an Amazon gift card (or currency equivalent) in invitation letter.
Group 3 Information
Group 3 Information about the prize draw incentive for 50% of an Amazon gift (or currency equivalent) in the invitation letter.
Group 3 information
Group 3 prize draw information for participants to win 50% of an Amazon gift card (or currency equivalent) in invitation letter.
Group 4 Information
Group 4 Information about the prize draw incentive for 25% of an Amazon gift (or currency equivalent) in the invitation letter.
Group 4 information
Group 4 prize draw information for participants to win 25% of an Amazon gift card (or currency equivalent) in invitation letter.
Group 5 No Information
Group 5 No Information incentive for an Amazon gift certificate (or currency equivalent) in the invitation letter.
Group 5 no information
Group 5 no Information for participants to enter a draw to win an Amazon gift card (or currency equivalent) in invitation letter.
Group A reminder
One survey reminder at 14 days
Group A Reminder
One survey reminder at 14 days
Group B reminders
Two survey reminders 14 days and 28 days
Group B Reminders
Two survey reminders one at 14 days and one at 28 days
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Group 1 information
Group 1 prize draw information for participants to win 100% of an Amazon gift card (or currency equivalent) in invitation letter.
Group 2 information
Group 2 prize draw information for participants to win 75% of an Amazon gift card (or currency equivalent) in invitation letter.
Group 3 information
Group 3 prize draw information for participants to win 50% of an Amazon gift card (or currency equivalent) in invitation letter.
Group 4 information
Group 4 prize draw information for participants to win 25% of an Amazon gift card (or currency equivalent) in invitation letter.
Group 5 no information
Group 5 no Information for participants to enter a draw to win an Amazon gift card (or currency equivalent) in invitation letter.
Group A Reminder
One survey reminder at 14 days
Group B Reminders
Two survey reminders one at 14 days and one at 28 days
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Corresponding authors of BMJ Group full-length original research submissions in 2013
* BMJ Group Reviewers who completed a review of a manuscript for "original research", "research" or "paper" in 2014.
* BMJ authors, reviewers, and reviewers with a viable email address
Exclusion Criteria
* Potential participants who have opted out of BMJ communications
* Participants in BMJ surveys within the last 6 months
18 Years
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
The BMJ
OTHER
University of Oxford
OTHER
Queen's University, Belfast
OTHER
ThinkWell
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Mike Clarke, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Queens University Belfast
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
ThinkWell
Oxford, Oxfordshire, United Kingdom
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Asch DA, Jedrziewski MK, Christakis NA. Response rates to mail surveys published in medical journals. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997 Oct;50(10):1129-36. doi: 10.1016/s0895-4356(97)00126-1.
Kenyon J, Sprague N, Flathers E. The Journal Article as a Means to Share Data: a Content Analysis of Supplementary Materials from Two Disciplines. J Librarianship Scholarly Community 2016;4:eP2112. doi:10.7710/2162-3309.2112
Baruch Y, Holtom BC. Survey response rate levels and trends in organizational research. Hum Relations 2008;61:1139-60. doi:10.1177/0018726708094863
Cobanoglu C. The effect of incentives in web surveys : application and ethical considerations. Int J Mark Res 2003;45:475-88.
Beebe L. Supplemental materials for journal articles: NISO/NFAIS working group. Information Standards Quarterly 2010;22:33-7. doi:10 .3789/isqv22n3.2010.07
Education section - Studies Within A Trial (SWAT). J Evid Based Med. 2012 Feb;5(1):44-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1756-5391.2012.01169.x. No abstract available.
Price A, Schroter S, Clarke M, McAneney H. Role of supplementary material in biomedical journal articles: surveys of authors, reviewers and readers. BMJ Open. 2018 Sep 24;8(9):e021753. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-021753.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
ThinkWell
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.