Dataset Information

Comparison of Web-Based Advertising and a Social Media Platform as Recruitment Tools for Underserved and Hard-to-Reach Populations in Rheumatology Clinical Research.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Traditional nondigital methods of participant recruitment for clinical research studies in rheumatology can be costly and inefficient, particularly for recruitment of underserved populations. We aimed to address this need by evaluating two methods of online recruitment to an observational cohort of individuals at risk for rheumatoid arthritis, namely web and Facebook advertisements.

Methods

A 3-month countywide web-based recruitment campaign was conducted consisting of text and image-based advertisements. Similar advertisements were subsequently displayed on Facebook, initially in English for 5 months and later in Spanish for an additional 3 months. Individuals who clicked on advertisements were directed to a website landing page containing study information and could contact study personnel to schedule testing for anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide-3 (CCP3). The primary outcome measure for each campaign was the click-through rate.

Results

During the web campaign, 413,289 advertisement impressions were displayed, resulting in 428 clicks (click-through rate 0.10%) and only one screened participant. During the English Facebook campaign, 724,815 advertisements were displayed with 6765 clicks (click-through rate 0.93%) and 43 screened participants, significantly greater than the web campaign (P < 0.001). During the Spanish advertisement campaign, 255,730 Spanish advertisements were displayed, resulting in a click-through rate of 2.09% and 24 screened participants, a significantly higher rate than English advertisements. Of participants recruited through social media, 94% were female and 29.8% were Spanish speakers.

Conclusion

Facebook advertisements were superior to web advertisements for participant recruitment. Spanish Facebook advertisements had a greater click-through rate than English Facebook advertisements. Facebook was an effective recruitment method, particularly for Spanish speakers.

SUBMITTER: Tsaltskan V

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9274346 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn recent years, there has been a proliferation of third-party Web-based services available to consumers to interpret raw DNA from direct-to-consumer genetic testing companies. Little is known about who uses these services and the downstream health implications. Identifying this hard-to-reach population of consumers for research raised questions about the most effective recruitment methods to undertake. Past studies have found that Web-based social media survey distribution can be cost-effective for targeting hard-to-reach populations, yet comparative efficacy information across platforms is limited.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to identify the most effective Web-based strategies to identify and recruit the target population of direct-to-consumer genetic testing users who also made use of third-party interpretation services to analyze their raw genetic data. Web-based survey recruitment methods varying by social media platform and advertising method were compared in terms of cost-effectiveness and demographics of survey respondents.MethodsA total of 5 Web-based survey distribution conditions were examined: 4 paid advertising services and 1 unpaid service. For the paid services, a 2x2 quasi-experimental design compared social media platforms (Facebook vs Twitter) and advertising tracking metrics (by click vs by conversion). The fifth unpaid comparison method consisted of study postings on the social media platform, Reddit, without any paid advertising. Links to identical Web-based versions of the study questionnaire were posted for 10 to 14 days for each of the distribution conditions, which allowed tracking the number of respondents that entered and completed the questionnaire by distribution condition.ResultsIn total, 438 individuals were recruited to the study through all conditions. A nearly equivalent number of participants were recruited from paid campaigns on Facebook (n=159) and Twitter (n=167), with a smaller sample recruited on Reddit (n=112). Significantly more participants were recruited through conversion-tracking (n=222) than through click-tracking campaigns (n=104; Z=6.5, P<.001). Response rates were found to be partially driven by organic sharing of recruitment materials among social media users. Conversion tracking was more cost-effective than click tracking across paid social media platforms. Significant differences in terms of gender and age distributions were noted between the platforms and between the tracking metrics.ConclusionsWeb-based recruitment methods were effective at recruiting participants from a hard-to-reach population in a short time frame. There were significant differences in the effectiveness of various paid advertising techniques. Recruitment through Web-based communities also appeared to perform adequately, yet it may be limited by the number of users accessible in open community groups. Future research should evaluate the impact of organic sharing of recruitment materials because this appeared to play a substantial role in the observed effectiveness of different methods.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Recruiting hard-to-reach populations for health research is challenging. Web-based platforms offer one way to recruit specific samples for research purposes, but little is known about the feasibility of online recruitment and the representativeness and comparability of samples recruited through different Web-based platforms. OBJECTIVE:The objectives of this study were to determine the feasibility of recruiting a hard-to-reach population (pregnant smokers) using 4 different Web-based platforms and to compare participants recruited through each platform. METHODS:A screener and survey were distributed online through Qualtrics Panel, Soapbox Sample, Reddit, and Amazon Mechanical Turk (mTurk). Descriptive statistics were used to summarize results of each recruitment platform, including eligibility yield, quality yield, income, race, age, and gestational age. RESULTS:Of the 3847 participants screened for eligibility across all 4 Web-based platforms, 535 were eligible and 308 completed the survey. Amazon mTurk yielded the fewest completed responses (n=9), 100% (9/9) of which passed several quality metrics verifying pregnancy and smoking status. Qualtrics Panel yielded 14 completed responses, 86% (12/14) of which passed the quality screening. Soapbox Sample produced 107 completed surveys, 67% (72/107) of which were found to be quality responses. Advertising through Reddit produced the highest completion rate (n=178), but only 29.2% (52/178) of those surveys passed the quality metrics. We found significant differences in eligibility yield, quality yield, age, number of previous pregnancies, age of smoking initiation, current smokers, race, education, and income (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS:Although each platform successfully recruited pregnant smokers, results varied in quality, cost, and percentage of complete responses. Moving forward, investigators should pay careful attention to the percentage yield and cost of online recruitment platforms to maximize internal and external validity.

Project description:PurposeAsthma interventions targeting urban adolescents are rare, despite a great need. Motivating adolescents to achieve better self-management of asthma is challenging, and the literature suggests that certain subgroups are more resistant than others. We conducted a school-based, randomized controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate Puff City, a Web-based, tailored asthma intervention, which included a referral coordinator, and incorporated theory-based strategies to target urban teens with characteristics previously found to be associated with lack of behavior change.MethodsTo identify eligible teens, we administered questionnaires on asthma diagnoses and symptoms to ninth through 12th graders of participating schools during a scheduled English class. We randomized eligible, consenting students to Puff City (treatment) or generic asthma education (control).ResultsWe randomized 422 students (98% African-American, mean age = 15.6 years). At 12-month follow-up, adjusted odds ratios (aORs) (95% confidence intervals) indicated intervention benefit for treatment teens for symptom-days and restricted activity days (analyzed as categorical variables) as aOR = .49 (.24-.79), p = .006 and .53 (.32-.86), p = .010, respectively. Among teens meeting baseline criteria for rebelliousness, treatment teens reported fewer symptom-days, symptom-nights, school absences, and restricted activity days: aOR = .30 (.11-.80), .29 (.14-.64), .40 (.20-.78), and .23 (.10-.55); all p < .05. Among teens reporting low perceived emotional support, treatment students reported only fewer symptom-days than controls: aOR = .23 (.06-.88), p = .031. We did not observe statistically significant differences in medical care use.ConclusionsResults suggest that a theory-based, tailored approach, with a referral coordinator, can improve asthma management in urban teens. Puff City represents a viable strategy for disseminating an effective intervention to high-risk and hard-to-reach populations.

Project description:Stoffenmanager®v4.5 and Advanced REACH Tool (ART) v1.5, two higher tier exposure assessment tools for use under REACH, were evaluated by determining accuracy and robustness. A total of 282 exposure measurements from 51 exposure situations (ESs) were collected and categorized by exposure category. In this study, only the results of liquids with vapor pressure (VP) > 10 Pa category having a sufficient number of exposure measurements (n = 251 with 42 ESs) were utilized. In addition, the results were presented by handling/activity description and input parameters for the same exposure category. It should be noted that the performance results of Stoffenmanager and ART in this study cannot be directly compared for some ESs because ART allows a combination of up to four subtasks (and nonexposed periods) to be included, whereas the database for Stoffenmanager, separately developed under the permission of the legal owner of Stoffenmanager, permits the use of only one task to predict exposure estimates. Thus, it would be most appropriate to compare full-shift measurements against ART predictions (full shift including nonexposed periods) and task-based measurements against task-based Stoffenmanager predictions. For liquids with VP > 10 Pa category, Stoffenmanager®v4.5 appeared to be reasonably accurate and robust when predicting exposures [percentage of measurements exceeding the tool's 90th percentile estimate (%M > T) was 15%]. Areas that could potentially be improved include ESs involving the task of handling of liquids on large surfaces or large work pieces, allocation of high and medium VP inputs, and absence of local exhaust ventilation input. Although the ART's median predictions appeared to be reasonably accurate for liquids with VP > 10 Pa, the %M > T for the 90th percentile estimates was 41%, indicating that variance in exposure levels is underestimated by ART. The %M > T using the estimates of the upper value of 90% confidence interval (CI) of the 90th percentile estimate (UCI90) was considerably reduced to 18% for liquids with VP > 10 Pa. On the basis of this observation, users might be to consider using the upper limit value of 90% CI of the 90th percentile estimate for predicting reasonable worst case situations. Nevertheless, for some activities and input parameters, ART still shows areas to be improved. Hence, it is suggested that ART developers review the assumptions in relation to exposure variability within the tool, toward improving the tool performance in estimating percentile exposure levels. In addition, for both tools, only some handling/activity descriptions and input parameters were considered. Thus, further validation studies are still necessary.

Project description:Tier 1 occupational exposure assessment tools recommended for use under the Registration, Evaluation, Authorization, and restriction of CHemicals (REACH) were evaluated using newly collected measurement data. Evaluated tools included the ECETOC TRAv2 and TRAv3, MEASEv1.02.01, and EMKG-EXPO-TOOL. Fifty-three exposure situations (ESs) based on tasks/chemicals were developed from National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health field surveys. During the field surveys, high quality contextual information required for evaluating the tools was also collected. For each ES, applicable tools were then used to generate exposure estimates using a consensus approach. Among 53 ESs, only those related to an exposure category of liquids with vapor pressure (VP) > 10 Pa had sufficient numbers of exposure measurements (42 ESs with n = 251 for TRAv2 and TRAv3 and 40 ESs with n = 243 for EMKG-EXPO-TOOL) to be considered in detail. The results for other exposure categories (aqueous solutions, liquids with VP ≤ 10 Pa, metal processing, powders, and solid objects) had insufficient measurement to allow detailed analyses (results listed in the Supplementary File). Overall, EMKG-EXPO-TOOL generated more conservative results than TRAv2 and TRAv3 for liquids with high VP. This finding is at least partly due to the fact that the EMKG-EXPO-TOOL only considers pure substances and not mixtures of chemical agents. For 34 out of 40 ESs available for chemicals with VP > 10 Pa, the liquid was a mixture rather than a pure substance. TRAv3 was less conservative than TRAv2, probably due to additional refinement of some input parameters. The percentages of exposure measurement results exceeding the corresponding tool estimates for liquids with VP > 10 Pa by process category and by input parameters were always higher for TRAv3 compared to those for TRAv2. Although the conclusions of this study are limited to liquids with VP > 10 Pa and few process categories, this study utilized the most transparent contextual information compared to previous studies, reducing uncertainty from assumptions for unknown input parameters. A further validation is recommended by collecting sufficient exposure data covering other exposure categories and all process categories under REACH.