Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Nov 14;15(11):e250.
doi: 10.2196/jmir.2829.

The good, bad, and ugly of online recruitment of parents for health-related focus groups: lessons learned

Affiliations

The good, bad, and ugly of online recruitment of parents for health-related focus groups: lessons learned

Susan Quach et al. J Med Internet Res. .

Abstract

Background: We describe our experiences with identifying and recruiting Ontario parents through the Internet, primarily, as well as other modes, for participation in focus groups about adding the influenza vaccine to school-based immunization programs.

Objective: Our objectives were to assess participation rates with and without incentives and software restrictions. We also plan to examine study response patterns of unique and multiple submissions and assess efficiency of each online advertising mode.

Methods: We used social media, deal forum websites, online classified ads, conventional mass media, and email lists to invite parents of school-aged children from Ontario, Canada to complete an online questionnaire to determine eligibility for focus groups. We compared responses and paradata when an incentive was provided and there were no software restrictions to the questionnaire (Period 1) to a period when only a single submission per Internet protocol (IP) address (ie, software restrictions invoked) was permitted and no incentive was provided (Period 2). We also compared the median time to complete a questionnaire, response patterns, and percentage of missing data between questionnaires classified as multiple submissions from the same Internet protocol (IP) address or email versus unique submissions. Efficiency was calculated as the total number of hours study personnel devoted to an advertising mode divided by the resultant number of unique eligible completed questionnaires .

Results: Of 1346 submitted questionnaires, 223 (16.6%) were incomplete and 34 (2.52%) did not meet the initial eligibility criteria. Of the remaining 1089 questionnaires, 246 (22.6%) were not from Ontario based on IP address and postal code, and 469 (43.1%) were submitted from the same IP address or email address (multiple submissions). In Period 2 vs Period 1, a larger proportion of questionnaires were submitted from Ontario (92.8%, 141/152 vs 75.1%, 702/937, P<.001), and a smaller proportion of same IP addresses (7.9%, 12/152 vs 47.1%, 441/937, P<.001) were received. Compared to those who made unique submissions, those who made multiple submissions spent less time per questionnaire (166 vs 215 seconds, P<.001), and had a higher percentage of missing data among their responses (15.0% vs 7.6%, P=.004). Advertisements posted on RedFlagDeals were the most efficient for recruitment (0.03 hours of staff time per questionnaire), whereas those placed on Twitter were the least efficient (3.64 hours of staff time per questionnaire).

Conclusions: Using multiple online advertising strategies was effective for recruiting a large sample of participants in a relatively short period time with minimal resources. However, risks such as multiple submissions and potentially fraudulent information need to be considered. In our study, these problems were associated with providing an incentive for responding, and could have been partially avoided by activating restrictive software features for online questionnaires.

Keywords: Internet; communication; data collection; parents; social media.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Study timeline showing questionnaire submissions in relation to the use of incentives and survey restrictions throughout the study (October 2012-February 2013).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Participant flow diagram.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Sherr L, Davé S, Lucas P, Senior R, Nazareth I. A feasibility study on recruiting fathers of young children to examine the impact of paternal depression on child development. Child Psychiatry Hum Dev. 2006;36(3):295–309. doi: 10.1007/s10578-005-0004-3. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Patel MX, Doku V, Tennakoon L. Challenges in recruitment of research participants. Advances in Psychiatric Treatment. 2003;9:229–238. doi: 10.1192/apt.9.3.229. - DOI
    1. Graham AL, Milner P, Saul JE, Pfaff L. Online advertising as a public health and recruitment tool: comparison of different media campaigns to increase demand for smoking cessation interventions. J Med Internet Res. 2008;10(5):e50. doi: 10.2196/jmir.1001. http://www.jmir.org/2008/5/e50/ - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ramo DE, Hall SM, Prochaska JJ. Reaching young adult smokers through the internet: comparison of three recruitment mechanisms. Nicotine Tob Res. 2010 Jul;12(7):768–75. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntq086. http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/20530194 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ramo DE, Prochaska JJ. Broad reach and targeted recruitment using Facebook for an online survey of young adult substance use. J Med Internet Res. 2012;14(1):e28. doi: 10.2196/jmir.1878. http://www.jmir.org/2012/1/e28/ - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types