4.6 Article

E-mail invitations to general practitioners were as effective as postal invitations and were more efficient

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
卷 65, 期 7, 页码 793-797

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.11.010

关键词

Recruitment; Randomized controlled trials; E-mail; Postal; Reminders; Primary care

资金

  1. Chief Scientist Office [CZH/4/610]
  2. Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health Directorates
  3. Chief Scientist Office [CZH/4/610, HSRU2] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To evaluate which of two invitation methods, e-mail or post, was most effective at recruiting general practitioners (GPs) to an online trial. Study Design and Setting: Randomized controlled trial. Participants were GPs in Scotland, United Kingdom. Results: Two hundred and seventy GPs were recruited. Using e-mail did not improve recruitment (risk difference = 0.7% [95% confidence interval -2.7% to 4.1%]). E-mail was, however, simpler to use and cheaper, costing 3.20 pound per recruit compared with 15.69 pound for postal invitations. Reminders increased recruitment by around 4% for each reminder sent for both invitation methods. Conclusions: In the Scottish context, inviting GPs to take part in an online trial by e-mail does not adversely affect recruitment and is logistically easier and cheaper than using postal invitations. (C) 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据