Recruitment of adolescents for a smoking study: use of traditional strategies and social media

Abstract

Engaging and retaining adolescents in research studies is challenging. Social media offers utility for expanding the sphere of research recruitment. This study examined and compared traditional and Facebook-based recruitment strategies on reach, enrollment, cost, and retention. Substance users aged 13-17 years were recruited through several methods, including social media, a study website, fliers, talks in schools, bus ads, and referrals. Study involvement included a one-time visit and semiannual follow-up surveys. 1265 individuals contacted study personnel; 629 were ineligible; 129 declined; and 200 participants enrolled. Facebook drew the greatest volume but had a high rate of ineligibles. Referrals were the most successful and cost-effective ($7 per enrolled participant); school talks were the least. Recruitment source was unrelated to retention success. Facebook may expand recruitment reach, but had greater financial costs and more ineligible contacts, resulting in fewer enrollees relative to traditional interpersonal recruitment methods. Referrals, though useful for study engagement, did not provide a differential benefit in terms of long-term retention.

Comparison of internet and mailing methods to recruit couples into research on unaided smoking cessation

“…Recruitment strategies that target large populations tend to be more cost-effective (e.g., a national sample at 4.28 USD/person; Ramo & Prochaska, 2012) than those that recruit local populations (e.g., 149.64 USD/person; Rait et al, 2015). The current study also included highly specific and restrictive eligibility criteria, which tends to make studies more expensive (e.g., 149.64 USD/person; Rait et al, 2015) than those with fewer requirements (e.g., 8.92 USD/person; Carlini et al, 2015). Finally, the larger study required two in-lab sessions and a 3-week EMA commitment.…”

“…Paid advertising on Facebook reaches much of the local population (Frandsen, Walters, & Ferguson, 2014), accesses hard-to-reach populations (Rait, Prochaska, & Rubinstein, 2015), allows targeting by demographics or keywords (Carlini, Safioti, Rue, & Miles, 2015; Ramo & Prochaska, 2012; Ramo, Rodriguez, Chavez, Sommer, & Prochaska, 2014), and can be less expensive than traditional advertising and other types of internet recruitment (Carlini et al, 2015; Ramo et al, 2014; but see Rait et al, 2015). Accordingly, paid Facebook advertising might be ideal to recruit smoking couples from a local population.…”

Recruiting Hard-to-Reach Populations for Survey Research: Using Facebook and Instagram Advertisements and In-Person Intercept in LGBT Bars and Nightclubs to Recruit LGBT Young Adults (Preprint)

“…Researchers are increasingly turning to innovative strategies for recruiting HTR populations versus traditional methods [23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34]. One strategy that researchers use to recruit young adults involves conducting intercept interviews in social venues (eg, bars, nightclubs) where the target population spends time.…”

“…A second strategy that has become popular for recruiting HTR populations for survey research is the use of targeted ads on social media platforms, such as Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter [29,[31][32][33][34][35][36][37]. Social media platforms possess massive quantities of user data that allow for highly specific targeting of ads to HTR populations on multiple features, such as age, gender, location, interests, and relationship preferences (women interested in women, women interested in women and men, men interested in men, men interested in women and men).…”

“…Social media platforms possess massive quantities of user data that allow for highly specific targeting of ads to HTR populations on multiple features, such as age, gender, location, interests, and relationship preferences (women interested in women, women interested in women and men, men interested in men, men interested in women and men). A growing number of studies have successfully recruited HTR populations via social media, including young adult and adolescent smokers in the United States [29,[31][32], adult ecigarette users [35], adult gay men [33,[38][39], gay and bisexual youth [30], adolescent and young adult women in Australia [37,40], and HIVpositive adults in the United States [34].…”