The Library

Does a monetary incentive improve the response to a postal questionnaire in a randomised controlled trial? : the MINT incentive study

Tools

Gates, Simon, Williams, Mark A., Withers, Emma J., Williamson, Esther M., Mt-Isa, Shahrul and Lamb, S. E. (Sallie E.). (2009) Does a monetary incentive improve the response to a postal questionnaire in a randomised controlled trial? : the MINT incentive study. Trials, Vol.10 . p. 44. ISSN 1745-6215

Preview

PDF
WRAP_Gates_monetary_incentive.pdf - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
Download (264Kb)

Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-10-44

Abstract

Background: Sending a monetary incentive with postal questionnaires has been found to improve the proportion of responders, in research in non-healthcare settings. However, there is little research on use of incentives to improve follow-up rates in clinical trials, and existing studies are inconclusive. We conducted a randomised trial among participants in the Managing Injuries of the Neck Trial (MINT) to investigate the effects on the proportion of questionnaires returned and overall non-response of sending a £5 gift voucher with a follow-up questionnaire. Methods: Participants in MINT were randomised to receive either: (a) a £5 gift voucher (incentive group) or (b) no gift voucher (no incentive group), with their 4 month or 8 month follow-up questionnaire. We recorded, for each group, the number of questionnaires returned, the number returned without any chasing from the study office, the overall number of non-responders (after all chasing efforts by the study office), and the costs of following up each group. Results: 2144 participants were randomised, 1070 to the incentive group and 1074 to the no incentive group. The proportion of questionnaires returned (RR 1.10 (95% CI 1.05, 1.16)) and the proportion returned without chasing (RR 1.14 (95% CI 1.05, 1.24) were higher in the incentive group, and the overall non-response rate was lower (RR 0.68 (95% CI 0.53, 0.87)). Adjustment for injury severity and hospital of recruitment to MINT made no difference to these results, and there were no differences in results between the 4-month and 8-month follow up questionnaires. Analysis of costs suggested a cost of £67.29 per additional questionnaire returned. Conclusion: Monetary incentives may be an effective way to increase the proportion of postal questionnaires returned and minimise loss to follow-up in clinical trials.

Item Type:	Journal Article
Subjects:	R Medicine > R Medicine (General) H Social Sciences > HA Statistics
Divisions:	Faculty of Medicine > Warwick Medical School > Health Sciences Faculty of Medicine > Warwick Medical School
Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH):	Medical care surveys -- Response rate, Mail surveys -- Response rate, Nonresponse (Statistics), Incentive (Psychology), Clinical medicine -- Research
Journal or Publication Title:	Trials
Publisher:	BioMed Central Ltd.
ISSN:	1745-6215
Date:	22 June 2009
Volume:	Vol.10
Number of Pages:	7
Page Range:	p. 44
Identification Number:	10.1186/1745-6215-10-44
Status:	Peer Reviewed
Access rights to Published version:	Open Access
Funder:	NHS R & D HTA Programme (Great Britain) (HTA)
Grant number:	02/35/02 (HTA)
References:	1. Edwards PJ, Roberts IG, Clarke MJ, DiGuiseppi C, Wentz R, Kwan I, Cooper R, Felix L, Pratap S: Methods to increase response rates to postal questionnaires. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007, 18(2):MR000008. 2. Nakash RA, Hutton JL, Jorstad-Stein EC, Gates S, Lamb SE, Nakash RA, Hutton JL, Jorstad-Stein EC, Gates S, Lamb SE: Maximising response to postal questionnaires-a systematic review of randomised trials in health research. BMC Med Res Methodol 2006, 6:5. 3. Dirmaier J, Harfst T, Koch U, Schulz H, Dirmaier J, Harfst T, Koch U, Schulz H: Incentives increased return rates but did not influence partial nonresponse or treatment outcome in a randomized trial. J Clin Epidemiol 2007, 60(12):1263-1270. 4. Kenyon S, Pike K, Jones D, Taylor D, Salt A, Marlow N, Brocklehurst P, Kenyon S, Pike K, Jones D, et al.: The effect of a monetary incentive on return of a postal health and development questionnaire: a randomised trial [ISRCTN53994660]. BMC Health Serv Res 2005, 5:55. 5. Brealey SD, Atwell C, Bryan S, Coulton S, Cox H, Cross B, Fylan F, Garratt A, Gilbert FJ, Gillan MG, et al.: Improving response rates using a monetary incentive for patient completion of questionnaires: an observational study. BMC Med Res Methodol 2007, 7:12. 6. Lamb SE, Gates S, Underwood MR, Cooke MW, Ashby D, Szczepura A, Williams MA, Williamson EM, Withers EJ, Mt-Isa S, et al.: Managing Injuries of the Neck Trial (MINT): design of a randomised controlled trial of treatments for whiplash associated disorders. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2007, 8:7. 7. Vernon H, Mior S: The Neck Disability Index: a study of reliability and validity. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 1991, 14(7):409-415. 8. Spitzer WO, Skovron ML, Salmi LR, Cassidy JD, Duranceau J, Suissa S, Zeiss E: Scientific monograph of the Quebec Task Force on Whiplash-Associated Disorders: redefining "whiplash" and its management. Spine 1995, 20(8 Suppl):1S-73S. 9. Kenyon SL, Taylor DJ, Tarnow-Mordi W, Group OC: Broad-spectrum antibiotics for preterm, prelabour rupture of fetal membranes: the ORACLE I randomised trial. ORACLE Collaborative Group. Lancet 2001, 357(9261):979-988. 10. Kenyon SL, Taylor DJ, Tarnow-Mordi W, Group OC: Broad-spectrum antibiotics for spontaneous preterm labour: the ORACLE II randomised trial. ORACLE Collaborative Group. Lancet 2001, 357(9261):989-994. 11. Edwards P, Cooper R, Roberts I, Frost C: Meta-analysis of randomised trials of monetary incentives and response to mailed questionnaires. J Epidemiol Community Health 2005, 59(11):987-999.
URI:	http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/id/eprint/2261