How Frequently and in What Format Are Research Trial Results Disseminated to Participants (ResponseQT)
NCT ID: NCT03021863
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
1198 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2017-01-15
2019-09-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
To mitigate these challenges, reminder emails are sent to questionnaire respondents. There is uncertainty about how the tone of the email reminder affects the proportion of recruitment rates.
A nested randomized trial will be used to test the intervention of tone delivery in survey email reminders to establish an evidence base. This study (ResponseQT) proposes to link with the anticipated 20,000 person international cohort study, (How Frequently and in What Format are Research Trial Results Disseminated to Participants: A Survey of Trialists (ResponseQT) to explore the evidence of effect for the research question, "Does the tone of a survey email reminder affect the proportion of survey participants recruited. The population will consist of researchers who have published a clinical trial indexed in Pub Med in 2014-15.The intervention is the tone of questionnaire email reminders and the outcomes will be the proportion of participants recruited after invitation (partial plus complete responses) following reminder 1 and 2.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
The Role of Supplementary Material in Journal Articles QT
NCT02961036
Protocol Lab for Online Trial Delphi and Question Effects
NCT03498677
The Effect of a Scratch Off Prompt on Health Engagement
NCT01401621
Text-based Reminders to Promote COVID-19 Vaccinations
NCT04801524
Comparing the Effectiveness of Different Appointment Reminder Methods
NCT06767423
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Dissemination is the planned process by which results of studies are communicated to the stakeholders of that research. Stakeholders can include health policy makers, academics, practicing clinicians and other health service workers, patients, the general public, and research funders. There are multiple ways to disseminate research findings and it is often considered a shared responsibility between funders and research investigators. Traditionally, the focus has targeted healthcare professionals, policy makers, and academics through journal publications and conference presentations. However, optimal knowledge translation depends on disseminating results to all stakeholders in a way that enables them to consider the implications of the results.
Effective communication and active dissemination of research results to patients and the lay public is essential for making informed decisions and choices, but it is sometimes considered as an afterthought. Furthermore, there is no consensus on what dissemination to patients or members of the lay public means, what is the most effective dissemination process and whether research results should be disseminated to relevant patient groups and the wider public as well as the patients who took part in the studies.
Only clinical trials indexed in PubMed 2014-15 where participants were enrolled into the study will be included. We will include screening questions at the start of the survey to exclude authors of non-randomised controlled trials, preclinical, and first-in-human trials and trials where there were no study participants.
AIM
To identify frequency and format of dissemination of clinical trial results to participants and to identify barriers to dissemination.
OBJECTIVES
1. To identify frequency of dissemination of recently published clinical trial results to participants;
2. To explore the format of results disseminated to participants and describe researchers' perceived appropriateness and accessibility of the format;
3. To identify how frequently research results are disseminated to patients beyond those taking part in the trials such as via advocacy groups;
4. To explore the frequency of public/patient involvement for determining the format, content, and extent of the dissemination plans;
5. To determine researchers' perceived confidence in disseminating results to participants and other patients.
This research will contain a study within a study (SWAT) also known as a nested trial (ResponseQT).
SWAT RATIONALE
Written communication in questionnaire email reminders are without verbal or sensory cues and it is difficult to modify reminders without feedback from respondents. It would be helpful to know what kind of tone the researcher can take to increase recruitment rates.
In questionnaires, the tone could be perceived as the perception of the researcher's attitude toward the reader and the subject of the message. The overall tone of a questionnaire reminder message may affect the reader just as one's tone of voice affects the listener in a verbal exchange. This could influence response and completion rates. Added to the complexity, tone can be interpreted differently by different individuals. Survey communications about reminders suggest two approaches appealing to a team victory with a sense of duty and benefit for others by participating or by building a sense of encouragement for participation. In addition, we will test whether introducing duty or encouragement in the second reminder (after a generic first reminder) makes a difference and whether someone who was exposed to duty or encouragement in the first reminder benefits from the reinforcement of a "nudge" from a generic reminder.
METHODS
This research involves exploring ways to increase recruitment rates through reminder emails that will be sent to those who were invited but have not yet responded to the questionnaire. A reminder will be sent to all non-respondents by email 14 days following the initial mailing. An additional reminder will be sent to all non-respondents by email 28 days following the first reminder. The nested trial (ResponseQT) will examine the evidence of effect for tone used within the questionnaire reminder emails. The group to which a participant is randomized will determine the tone of the questionnaire reminder emails.
All potential respondents will be randomized to one of nine groups. They will receive the same questionnaire invitation email. Reminders for non-responders be assigned according to the group they were randomized to:
Group A Tone = Duty x 2
Group B Tone = Encourage x 2
Group C Tone = Encourage + Duty
Group D Tone = Duty + encourage
Group E Tone = Generic tone reminders X 2
Group F Tone = Generic + Duty
Group G Tone = Generic + Encouragement
Group H Tone = Duty + Generic
Group I Tone = Encouragement + Generic
All non-responders will receive a reminder to complete the questionnaire at fourteen days according to the group they are randomized to. At twenty-eight days remaining non-responders will receive the second reminder email.
The outcomes of recruitment will be compared at three stages: initial response, following the first reminder and following the second reminder.
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
TRIPLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Group A Reminder
Tone of reminder email (duty 14 days followed by duty for non-responders 28 days)
Group A Reminder
Tone of reminder email (duty 14 days followed by duty 28 days for non-responders)
Group B Reminder
Tone of reminder email (encouragement 14 days followed by encouragement for non-responders 28 days)
Group B Reminder
Tone of reminder email (encouragement 14 days followed by encouragement 28 days for non-responders)
Group C Reminder
Tone of reminder email (encouragement 14 days followed by duty for non-responders 28 days)
Group C Reminder
Tone of reminder email (encouragement 14 days followed by duty for non-responders 28 days)
Group D Reminder
Tone of reminder email (duty 14 days followed by encouragement for non-responders 28 days)
Group D Reminder
Tone of reminder email (duty 14 days followed by encouragement for non-responders 28 days)
Group E Reminder
Tone of reminder email (generic reminders at 14 days followed by generic for non-responders 28 days)
Group E Reminder
Tone of reminder email (generic reminders 14 days followed by 28 days for non-responders)
Group F Reminder
Tone of reminder email (generic 14 days followed by duty for non-responders 28 days)
Group F Reminder
Tone of reminder email (generic 14 days followed by duty for non-responders 28 days)
Group G Reminder
Tone of reminder email (generic 14 days followed by encouragement for non-responders 28 days)
Group G Reminder
Tone of reminder email (generic 14 days followed by encouragement for non-responders 28 days)
Group H Reminder
Tone of reminder email (duty 14 days followed by generic for non-responders 28 days)
Group H Reminder
Tone of reminder email ( duty14 days followed by generic for non-responders 28 days)
Group I Reminder
Tone of reminder email (encouragement 14 days followed by generic for non-responders 28 days)
Group I Reminder
Tone of reminder email (encouragement 14 days followed by generic non-responders 28 days)
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Group A Reminder
Tone of reminder email (duty 14 days followed by duty 28 days for non-responders)
Group B Reminder
Tone of reminder email (encouragement 14 days followed by encouragement 28 days for non-responders)
Group C Reminder
Tone of reminder email (encouragement 14 days followed by duty for non-responders 28 days)
Group D Reminder
Tone of reminder email (duty 14 days followed by encouragement for non-responders 28 days)
Group E Reminder
Tone of reminder email (generic reminders 14 days followed by 28 days for non-responders)
Group F Reminder
Tone of reminder email (generic 14 days followed by duty for non-responders 28 days)
Group G Reminder
Tone of reminder email (generic 14 days followed by encouragement for non-responders 28 days)
Group H Reminder
Tone of reminder email ( duty14 days followed by generic for non-responders 28 days)
Group I Reminder
Tone of reminder email (encouragement 14 days followed by generic non-responders 28 days)
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
* reports of preclinical trials,
* reports of trials where there were no study participants
18 Years
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
University of Oxford
OTHER
The BMJ
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.
Amy I Price, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
ThinkWell
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.
Wilson PM, Petticrew M, Calnan MW, Nazareth I. Disseminating research findings: what should researchers do? A systematic scoping review of conceptual frameworks. Implement Sci. 2010 Nov 22;5:91. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-5-91.
Tetroe JM, Graham ID, Foy R, Robinson N, Eccles MP, Wensing M, Durieux P, Legare F, Nielson CP, Adily A, Ward JE, Porter C, Shea B, Grimshaw JM. Health research funding agencies' support and promotion of knowledge translation: an international study. Milbank Q. 2008 Mar;86(1):125-55. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0009.2007.00515.x.
Felix LM, Burchett HE, Edwards PJ. Factorial trial found mixed evidence of effects of pre-notification and pleading on response to Web-based survey. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011 May;64(5):531-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.06.001. Epub 2010 Sep 17.
Fang J, Shao P, Lan G. Effects of innovativeness and trust on web survey participation. Comput Human Behav 2009;25:144-52. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2008.08.002
Fan W, Yan Z. Factors affecting response rates of the web survey: A systematic review. Comput Human Behav 2010;26:132-9. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2009.10.015
Cook DA, Wittich CM, Daniels WL, West CP, Harris AM, Beebe TJ. Incentive and Reminder Strategies to Improve Response Rate for Internet-Based Physician Surveys: A Randomized Experiment. J Med Internet Res. 2016 Sep 16;18(9):e244. doi: 10.2196/jmir.6318.
Baruch Y, Holtom BC. Survey response rate levels and trends in organizational research. Hum Relations 2008;61:1139-60. doi:10.1177/0018726708094863
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
ThinkWell & BMJ 2
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.