Lessons From Recruitment to an Internet-Based Survey for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: Comparison of Free and Fee-Based Methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy (DCM) is a syndrome of subacute cervical spinal cord compression due to spinal degeneration. Although DCM is thought to be common, many fundamental questions such as the natural history and epidemiology of DCM remain unknown. In order to answer these, access to a large cohort of patients with DCM is required. With its unrivalled and efficient reach, the Internet has become an attractive tool for medical research and may overcome these limitations in DCM. The most effective recruitment strategy, however, is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of fee-based advertisement with alternative free recruitment strategies to a DCM Internet health survey. METHODS: An Internet health survey (SurveyMonkey) accessed by a new DCM Internet platform (myelopathy.org) was created. Using multiple survey collectors and the website's Google Analytics, the efficacy of fee-based recruitment strategies (Google AdWords) and free alternatives (including Facebook, Twitter, and myelopathy.org) were compared. RESULTS: Overall, 760 surveys (513 [68%] fully completed) were accessed, 305 (40%) from fee-based strategies and 455 (60%) from free alternatives. Accounting for researcher time, fee-based strategies were more expensive ($7.8 per response compared to $3.8 per response for free alternatives) and identified a less motivated audience (Click-Through-Rate of 5% compared to 57% using free alternatives) but were more time efficient for the researcher (2 minutes per response compared to 16 minutes per response for free methods). Facebook was the most effective free strategy, providing 239 (31%) responses, where a single message to 4 existing communities yielded 133 (18%) responses within 7 days. CONCLUSIONS: The Internet can efficiently reach large numbers of patients. Free and fee-based recruitment strategies both have merits. Facebook communities are a rich resource for Internet researchers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.503 | 0.637 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".