By the same authors

From the same journal

A Nested Randomised Controlled Trial of a Newsletter and Post-it Note Did not Increase Postal Questionnaire Response Rates in a Falls Prevention Trial

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Standard

A Nested Randomised Controlled Trial of a Newsletter and Post-it Note Did not Increase Postal Questionnaire Response Rates in a Falls Prevention Trial. / Rodgers, Sara Anita; Sbizzera, Illary; Cockayne, Elizabeth Sarah; Fairhurst, Caroline Marie; Lamb, Sarah; Vernon, Wesley; Watson, Judith M; Hewitt, Catherine Elizabeth; Torgerson, David John.

In: F1000research, Vol. 7, 7:1083, 16.07.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Harvard

Rodgers, SA, Sbizzera, I, Cockayne, ES, Fairhurst, CM, Lamb, S, Vernon, W, Watson, JM, Hewitt, CE & Torgerson, DJ 2018, 'A Nested Randomised Controlled Trial of a Newsletter and Post-it Note Did not Increase Postal Questionnaire Response Rates in a Falls Prevention Trial', F1000research, vol. 7, 7:1083.

APA

Rodgers, S. A., Sbizzera, I., Cockayne, E. S., Fairhurst, C. M., Lamb, S., Vernon, W., ... Torgerson, D. J. (2018). A Nested Randomised Controlled Trial of a Newsletter and Post-it Note Did not Increase Postal Questionnaire Response Rates in a Falls Prevention Trial. F1000research, 7, [7:1083].

Vancouver

Rodgers SA, Sbizzera I, Cockayne ES, Fairhurst CM, Lamb S, Vernon W et al. A Nested Randomised Controlled Trial of a Newsletter and Post-it Note Did not Increase Postal Questionnaire Response Rates in a Falls Prevention Trial. F1000research. 2018 Jul 16;7. 7:1083.

Author

Rodgers, Sara Anita ; Sbizzera, Illary ; Cockayne, Elizabeth Sarah ; Fairhurst, Caroline Marie ; Lamb, Sarah ; Vernon, Wesley ; Watson, Judith M ; Hewitt, Catherine Elizabeth ; Torgerson, David John. / A Nested Randomised Controlled Trial of a Newsletter and Post-it Note Did not Increase Postal Questionnaire Response Rates in a Falls Prevention Trial. In: F1000research. 2018 ; Vol. 7.

Bibtex - Download

@article{ec550cc796bd4cfebb36e37293d3d348,
title = "A Nested Randomised Controlled Trial of a Newsletter and Post-it Note Did not Increase Postal Questionnaire Response Rates in a Falls Prevention Trial",
abstract = "Background: Attrition (i.e. when participants do not return the questionnaires)is a problem for many randomised controlled trials. The resultant loss of dataleads to a reduction in statistical power and can lead to bias. The aim of thisstudy was to assess whether a pre-notification newsletter and/or a handwrittenor printed Post-it{\circledR} note sticker, as a reminder, increased postal questionnaireresponse rates for participants of randomised controlled trials.Method: This study was a factorial trial embedded within a trial of afalls-prevention intervention among men and women aged ≥65 years underpodiatric care. Participants were randomised into one of six groups: newsletterplus handwritten Post-it{\circledR}; newsletter plus printed Post-it{\circledR}; newsletter only;handwritten Post-it{\circledR} only; printed Post-it{\circledR} only; or no newsletter or Post-it{\circledR}.The results were combined with those from previous embedded randomisedcontrolled trials in a meta-analysis.Results: The 12-month response rate was 803/826 (97.2{\%}) (newsletter 95.1{\%},no newsletter 99.3{\%}, printed Post-it{\circledR} 97.5{\%}, handwritten Post-it{\circledR} 97.1{\%}, noPost-it{\circledR} 97.1{\%}). Pre-notification with a newsletter had a detrimental effect onresponse rates (adjusted odds ratio (OR), 0.14; 95{\%} CI, 0.04 to 0.48; p<0.01)and time to return the questionnaire (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.86; 95{\%} CI, 0.75to 0.99; p=0.04). No other statistically significant differences were observedbetween the intervention groups on response rates, time to response, and theneed for a reminder.Conclusions: Post-it{\circledR} notes have been shown to be ineffective in threeembedded trials, whereas the evidence for newsletter reminders is stilluncertain.KeywordsRandomised controlled trial; randomisation; embedded trial; newsletter;Post-it{\circledR} note; response rate",
author = "Rodgers, {Sara Anita} and Illary Sbizzera and Cockayne, {Elizabeth Sarah} and Fairhurst, {Caroline Marie} and Sarah Lamb and Wesley Vernon and Watson, {Judith M} and Hewitt, {Catherine Elizabeth} and Torgerson, {David John}",
note = "{\circledC} 2018 Rodgers S et al.",
year = "2018",
month = "7",
day = "16",
language = "English",
volume = "7",
journal = "F1000Research",
issn = "2046-1402",
publisher = "F1000 Research Ltd.",

}

RIS (suitable for import to EndNote) - Download

TY - JOUR

T1 - A Nested Randomised Controlled Trial of a Newsletter and Post-it Note Did not Increase Postal Questionnaire Response Rates in a Falls Prevention Trial

AU - Rodgers, Sara Anita

AU - Sbizzera, Illary

AU - Cockayne, Elizabeth Sarah

AU - Fairhurst, Caroline Marie

AU - Lamb, Sarah

AU - Vernon, Wesley

AU - Watson, Judith M

AU - Hewitt, Catherine Elizabeth

AU - Torgerson, David John

N1 - © 2018 Rodgers S et al.

PY - 2018/7/16

Y1 - 2018/7/16

N2 - Background: Attrition (i.e. when participants do not return the questionnaires)is a problem for many randomised controlled trials. The resultant loss of dataleads to a reduction in statistical power and can lead to bias. The aim of thisstudy was to assess whether a pre-notification newsletter and/or a handwrittenor printed Post-it® note sticker, as a reminder, increased postal questionnaireresponse rates for participants of randomised controlled trials.Method: This study was a factorial trial embedded within a trial of afalls-prevention intervention among men and women aged ≥65 years underpodiatric care. Participants were randomised into one of six groups: newsletterplus handwritten Post-it®; newsletter plus printed Post-it®; newsletter only;handwritten Post-it® only; printed Post-it® only; or no newsletter or Post-it®.The results were combined with those from previous embedded randomisedcontrolled trials in a meta-analysis.Results: The 12-month response rate was 803/826 (97.2%) (newsletter 95.1%,no newsletter 99.3%, printed Post-it® 97.5%, handwritten Post-it® 97.1%, noPost-it® 97.1%). Pre-notification with a newsletter had a detrimental effect onresponse rates (adjusted odds ratio (OR), 0.14; 95% CI, 0.04 to 0.48; p<0.01)and time to return the questionnaire (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.75to 0.99; p=0.04). No other statistically significant differences were observedbetween the intervention groups on response rates, time to response, and theneed for a reminder.Conclusions: Post-it® notes have been shown to be ineffective in threeembedded trials, whereas the evidence for newsletter reminders is stilluncertain.KeywordsRandomised controlled trial; randomisation; embedded trial; newsletter;Post-it® note; response rate

AB - Background: Attrition (i.e. when participants do not return the questionnaires)is a problem for many randomised controlled trials. The resultant loss of dataleads to a reduction in statistical power and can lead to bias. The aim of thisstudy was to assess whether a pre-notification newsletter and/or a handwrittenor printed Post-it® note sticker, as a reminder, increased postal questionnaireresponse rates for participants of randomised controlled trials.Method: This study was a factorial trial embedded within a trial of afalls-prevention intervention among men and women aged ≥65 years underpodiatric care. Participants were randomised into one of six groups: newsletterplus handwritten Post-it®; newsletter plus printed Post-it®; newsletter only;handwritten Post-it® only; printed Post-it® only; or no newsletter or Post-it®.The results were combined with those from previous embedded randomisedcontrolled trials in a meta-analysis.Results: The 12-month response rate was 803/826 (97.2%) (newsletter 95.1%,no newsletter 99.3%, printed Post-it® 97.5%, handwritten Post-it® 97.1%, noPost-it® 97.1%). Pre-notification with a newsletter had a detrimental effect onresponse rates (adjusted odds ratio (OR), 0.14; 95% CI, 0.04 to 0.48; p<0.01)and time to return the questionnaire (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.75to 0.99; p=0.04). No other statistically significant differences were observedbetween the intervention groups on response rates, time to response, and theneed for a reminder.Conclusions: Post-it® notes have been shown to be ineffective in threeembedded trials, whereas the evidence for newsletter reminders is stilluncertain.KeywordsRandomised controlled trial; randomisation; embedded trial; newsletter;Post-it® note; response rate

M3 - Article

VL - 7

JO - F1000Research

T2 - F1000Research

JF - F1000Research

SN - 2046-1402

M1 - 7:1083

ER -