IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0201378.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Recruiting and retaining participants in e-Delphi surveys for core outcome set development: Evaluating the COMiT'ID study

Author

Listed:
  • Deborah Ann Hall
  • Harriet Smith
  • Eithne Heffernan
  • Kathryn Fackrell
  • for the Core Outcome Measures in Tinnitus International Delphi (COMiT’ID) Research Steering Group

Abstract

Background: A Core Outcome Set (COS) is an agreed list of outcomes that are measured and reported in all clinical trials for a particular health condition. An ‘e-Delphi’ is an increasingly popular method for developing a COS whereby stakeholders are consulted via a multi-round online survey to reach agreement regarding the most important outcomes. Many COS studies seek diverse, international input that includes professionals and healthcare users. However, the recruitment and retention of participants can be deterred by various factors (e.g. language barriers and iterative, time-consuming rounds). This report evaluates the effectiveness of recruitment and retention methods used in the Core Outcome Measures in Tinnitus International Delphi (COMiT’ID) study using participant feedback from healthcare users, healthcare practitioners, researchers, commercial representatives and funders. Methods: A range of methods were applied to recruit participants to the study and maintain engagement over the three rounds. Feedback on recruitment and retention methods was collected using a twenty-item online questionnaire, with free text comments. Results: A personalised email invitation was the most frequent recruitment route, and 719 professionals and healthcare users consented to take part. Retention of each stakeholder group ranged from 76 to 91% completing all three e-Delphi rounds. Feedback was given by 379 respondents. A majority of respondents were satisfied with the study methods that were implemented to promote retention. Over 55% indicated that their overall experience closely matched their expectations at the start of the study, and over 90% felt that their contribution was appreciated. Conclusions: This report highlights study methods that worked well with respect to recruitment and retention, and those that did not. Findings provide a unique contribution to the growing evidence base of good practice in COS development by demonstrating the relative effectiveness of recruitment and retention methods for an e-Delphi survey. Trial registration: This project was registered (November 2014) in the database of the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative. The protocol is published in Trials (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-2123-0).

Suggested Citation

  • Deborah Ann Hall & Harriet Smith & Eithne Heffernan & Kathryn Fackrell & for the Core Outcome Measures in Tinnitus International Delphi (COMiT’ID) Research Steering Group, 2018. "Recruiting and retaining participants in e-Delphi surveys for core outcome set development: Evaluating the COMiT'ID study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(7), pages 1-22, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0201378
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0201378
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0201378
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0201378&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0201378?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0201378. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.