Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30819217›Full record

Trial reportBMC research notes2019

Altruistic donation to improve survey responses: a global randomized trial.

Andrew J Cohen, Sam Washington, Christi Butler, Puneet Kamal, German Patino, Anas Tresh, Jorge Mena, Medina Ndoye, Benjamin N Breyer

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC research notes, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Methods to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Andrew J CohenDepartment of Urology, Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center, University of California, San Francisco, 1001 Potrero Suite 3A, San Francisco, CA, 94110, USA.
Sam WashingtonDepartment of Urology, Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center, University of California, San Francisco, 1001 Potrero Suite 3A, San Francisco, CA, 94110, USA.
Christi ButlerDepartment of Urology, Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center, University of California, San Francisco, 1001 Potrero Suite 3A, San Francisco, CA, 94110, USA.
Puneet KamalDepartment of Urology, Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center, University of California, San Francisco, 1001 Potrero Suite 3A, San Francisco, CA, 94110, USA.
German PatinoDepartment of Urology, Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center, University of California, San Francisco, 1001 Potrero Suite 3A, San Francisco, CA, 94110, USA.
Anas TreshDepartment of Urology, Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center, University of California, San Francisco, 1001 Potrero Suite 3A, San Francisco, CA, 94110, USA.
Jorge MenaDepartment of Urology, Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center, University of California, San Francisco, 1001 Potrero Suite 3A, San Francisco, CA, 94110, USA.
Medina NdoyeDepartment of Urology, Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center, University of California, San Francisco, 1001 Potrero Suite 3A, San Francisco, CA, 94110, USA.
Benjamin N BreyerDepartment of Urology, Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center, University of California, San Francisco, 1001 Potrero Suite 3A, San Francisco, CA, 94110, USA. Benjamin.Breyer@ucsf.edu.

Funding

University of California, San Francisco Alafi Fund
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveWeb-based platforms have revolutionized the ability for researchers to perform global survey research. Methods to incentivize participation have been singularly focused on European and North American participants with varied results. With an ever increasing proportion of biomedical research being performed in non-western countries, assessment of novel methods to improve global survey response is timely and necessary. To that end, we created a three-arm nested randomized control trial (RCT) within a prospective cohort study to assess the impact of incentives on survey responsiveness in a global audience of biomedical researchers.

resultsEmail invitations were sent to authors and editors involved in online publishing totaling 2426 participants from 111 countries. Overall we observed a 13.0% response rate: 13.3% for the control group, 14.4% for a group entered to win a gift card, and 11.1% for a group whose participation lead to donation to charity (p = 0.17). Year of publication nor country impacted response rate. Within subgroups, editors were significantly less likely to respond to the survey as compared to authors (6.5% vs. 18.9%; p-value < 0.01). With power to detect a 4.8% difference among groups, we could not detect an impact of incentives on global survey response.

Indexed as

AltruismMotivationAdultBiomedical ResearchHumansProspective StudiesPublishingResearch PersonnelSurveys and QuestionnairesDonationGlobalIncentivesNested randomized controlSurvey response

Identifiers

PMID30819217
PMCPMC6396474

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.