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

J Clin Epidemiol. 2012 Jul;65(7):793-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.11.010. Epub 2012 Feb 4.

Abstract

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 per recruit compared with £15.69 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.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Multicenter Study
  • Randomized Controlled Trial
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Algorithms
  • Confidence Intervals
  • Electronic Mail / economics
  • Electronic Mail / statistics & numerical data*
  • Female
  • Follow-Up Studies
  • General Practitioners / statistics & numerical data*
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Patient Selection
  • Postal Service / economics
  • Postal Service / statistics & numerical data*
  • Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
  • Reminder Systems / statistics & numerical data*
  • Sampling Studies
  • Scotland / epidemiology
  • Surveys and Questionnaires