Search

BackgroundRecruitment of health research participants through social media is becoming more common. In the United States, 80% of adults use at least one social media platform. Social media platforms may allow researchers to reach potential participants efficiently. However, online research methods may be associated with unique threats to sample validity and data integrity. Limited research has described issues of data quality and authenticity associated with the recruitment of health research participants through social media, and sources of low-quality and fraudulent data in this context are poorly understood. ObjectiveThe goal of the research was to describe and explain threats to sample validity and data integrity following recruitment of health research participants through social media and summarize recommended strategies to mitigate these threats. Our experience designing and implementing a research study using social media recruitment and online data collection serves as a case study. MethodsUsing published strategies to preserve data integrity, we recruited participants to complete an online survey through the social media platforms Twitter and Facebook. Participants were to receive $15 upon survey completion. Prior to manually issuing remuneration, we reviewed completed surveys for indicators of fraudulent or low-quality data. Indicators attributable to respondent error were labeled suspicious, while those suggesting misrepresentation were labeled fraudulent. We planned to remove cases with 1 fraudulent indicator or at least 3 suspicious indicators. ResultsWithin 7 hours of survey activation, we received 271 completed surveys. We classified 94.5% (256/271) of cases as fraudulent and 5.5% (15/271) as suspicious. In total, 86.7% (235/271) provided inconsistent responses to verifiable items and 16.2% (44/271) exhibited evidence of bot automation. Of the fraudulent cases, 53.9% (138/256) provided a duplicate or unusual response to one or more open-ended items and 52.0% (133/256) exhibited evidence of inattention. ConclusionsResearch findings from several disciplines suggest studies in which research participants are recruited through social media are susceptible to data quality issues. Opportunistic individuals who use virtual private servers to fraudulently complete research surveys for profit may contribute to low-quality data. Strategies to preserve data integrity following research participant recruitment through social media are limited. Development and testing of novel strategies to prevent and detect fraud is a research priority.

BackgroundUnguided, web-based psychoeducational interventions are gaining interest as a way to reach patients while reducing pressure on clinical resources. However, there has been little research on how patients with cancer use these interventions. ObjectiveThe objective of this analysis was to evaluate how women newly diagnosed with breast cancer used the unguided web-based, psychoeducational distress self-management program CaringGuidance After Breast Cancer Diagnosis while enrolled in a pilot feasibility study. MethodsWomen with stage 0 to II breast cancer diagnosed within the prior three months were recruited from clinics primarily in the Northeastern United States for participation in a 12-week pilot study of CaringGuidance plus usual care versus usual care alone. Usage prompts included sets of emails sent weekly for 12 weeks; standardized congratulatory emails after every two hours of program use, and informative emails for each cognitive-behavioral exercise. Individual user activity on the site was automatically tracked by an analytics system and recorded directly in the CaringGuidance database. ResultsComplete usage data were available for 54 subjects. Ninety-eight percent of the intervention group logged into CaringGuidance independently at least once. Thirty-eight (70%) logged in during all three months, 15 (28%) were intermittent users, and one (2%) was a non-user. Users (n=53) averaged 15.6 (SD 9.85) logins. Mean logins were greatest in month 1 (7.26, SD 4.02) and declined in months 2 (4.32, SD 3.66) and month 3 (4.02, SD 3.82). Eleven (21%) used CaringGuidance with both the frequency and activity level intended at study outset, 9 (17%) exceeded intended frequency and activity (high-high users), and 10 (19%) were below expected usage on both login frequency and activity (low-low users). Low-low users and high-high users differed significantly (P

BackgroundEffective eHealth interventions can benefit a large number of patients with content intended to support self-care and management of both chronic and acute conditions. Even though usage statistics are easily logged in most eHealth interventions, usage or exposure has rarely been reported in trials, let alone studied in relationship to effectiveness. ObjectiveThe intent of the study was to evaluate use of a fully automated, Web-based program, the Electronic Self Report Assessment-Cancer (ESRA-C), and how delivery and total use of the intervention may have affected cancer symptom distress. MethodsPatients at two cancer centers used ESRA-C to self-report symptom and quality of life (SxQOL) issues during therapy. Participants were randomized to ESRA-C assessment only (control) or the ESRA-C intervention delivered via the Internet to patients’ homes or to a tablet at the clinic. The intervention enabled participants to self-monitor SxQOL and receive self-care education and customized coaching on how to report concerns to clinicians. Overall and voluntary intervention use were defined as having ≥2 exposures, and one non-prompted exposure to the intervention, respectively. Factors associated with intervention use were explored with Fisher’s exact test. Propensity score matching was used to select a sample of control participants similar to intervention participants who used the intervention. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used to compare change in Symptom Distress Scale (SDS-15) scores from pre-treatment to end-of-study by groups in the matched sample. ResultsRadiation oncology participants used the intervention, overall and voluntarily, more than medical oncology and transplant participants. Participants who were working and had more than a high school education voluntarily used the intervention more. The SDS-15 score was reduced by an estimated 1.53 points (P=.01) in the intervention group users compared to the matched control group. ConclusionsThe intended effects of a Web-based, patient-centered intervention on cancer symptom distress were modified by intervention use frequency. Clinical and personal demographics influenced voluntary use. Trial RegistrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT00852852; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00852852 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6YwAfwWl7).

Background Given that no other disease with the high incidence of localized prostate cancer (LPC) has so many treatments with so few certainties related to outcomes, many men are faced with assuming some responsibility for the treatment decision along with guidance from clinicians. Men strongly consider their own personal characteristics and other personal factors as important and influential to the decision. Clinical researchers have not developed or comprehensively investigated interventions to facilitate the insight and prioritizing of personal factors along with medical factors that are required of a man in preparation for the treatment decision. Objectives The purpose of this pilot study was to develop and evaluate the feasibility and usability of a Web-based decision support technology, the Personal Patient Profile-Prostate (P3P), in men newly diagnosed with LPC. Methods Use cases were developed followed by infrastructure and content application. The program was provided on a personal desktop computer with a touch screen monitor. Participant responses to the query component of P3P determined the content of the multimedia educational and coaching intervention. The intervention was tailored to race, age, and personal factors reported as influencing the decision. Prepilot usability testing was conducted using a “think aloud” interview to identify navigation and content challenges. These issues were addressed prior to deployment in the clinic. A clinical pilot was conducted in an academic medical center where men sought consultation and treatment for LPC. Completion time, missing data, and acceptability were measured. Results Prepilot testing included 4 men with a past diagnosis of LPC who had completed therapy. Technical navigation issues were documented along with confusing content language. A total of 30 additional men with a recent diagnosis of LPC completed the P3P program in clinic prior to consulting with a urologist regarding treatment options. In a mean time of 46 minutes (SD 13 minutes), participants completed the P3P query and intervention components. Of a possible 4560 items for 30 participants, 22 (0.5%) were missing. Acceptability was reported as high overall. The sections of the intervention reported as most useful were the statistics graphs, priority information topics, and annotated external website links. Conclusions The P3P intervention is a feasible and usable program to facilitate treatment decision making by men with newly diagnosed LPC. Testing in a multisite randomized trial with a diverse sample is warranted.

In the current research-focused climate, academics are facing increasing pressure to produce research outputs. This pressure can prove particularly daunting for early career (EC) academics, who are simultaneously attempting to master new teaching and administrative demands while establishing their own independent research trajectories. Previous reports suggest that academic writing retreats can be an effective way of increasing research outputs. Such retreats generally involve academics from a range of career stages and require expert facilitators. Through organising a series of structured writing events, this project aims to cultivate an enduring community of practice for academic writers. Reflecting on our EC retreat and subsequent writing days with academics from different career stages, we suggest that success hinged on three key factors: (1) "A formal structure" comprising bounded periods of intense writing, flanked by group reviewing and goal-setting; (2) "Co-located writing" with participants based in a shared space, away from their usual workstation and distractions; (3) "Peer discussions" involving participants at a similar career stage. Specifically we found that writing amongst "equals" increased productivity and confidence amongst EC academics.