Reasons for Discontinuing Active Participation on the Internet Forum Tinnitus Talk: Mixed Methods Citizen Science Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Tinnitus Talk is a nonprofit online self-help forum. Asking inactive users about their reasons for discontinued usage of health-related online platforms such as Tinnitus Talk is important for quality assurance. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore reasons for discontinued use of Tinnitus Talk, and their associations to the perceptions of Tinnitus Talk and the age of users who ceased logging on to the platform. METHODS: Initially, 13,745 users that did not use Tinnitus Talk within the previous 2 months were contacted and the response rate was 20.47% (n=2814). After dataset filtering, a total of 2172 past members of Tinnitus Talk were included in the analyses. Nine predefined reasons for discontinued usage of Tinnitus Talk were included in the survey as well as one open question. Moreover, there were 14 predefined questions focusing on perception of Tinnitus Talk (usefulness, content, community, and quality of members' posts). Mixed methods analyses were performed. Frequencies and correlation coefficients were calculated for quantitative data, and grounded theory methodology was utilized for exploration of the qualitative data. RESULTS: Quantitative analysis revealed reasons for discontinued use of Tinnitus Talk as well as associations of these reasons with perceptions of Tinnitus Talk and age. Among the eight predefined reasons for discontinued use of Tinnitus Talk, the most frequently reported was not finding the information they were looking for (451/2695, 16.7%). Overall, the highest rated perception of Tinnitus Talk was content-related ease of understanding (mean 3.9, SD 0.64). A high number (nearly 40%) of participants provided additional free text explaining why they discontinued use. Qualitative analyses identified a total of 1654 specific reasons, more than 93% of which (n=1544) could be inductively coded. The coding system consisted of 33 thematically labeled codes clustered into 10 categories. The most frequent additional reason for discontinuing use was thinking that there is no cure or help for tinnitus symptoms (375/1544, 24.3%). Significant correlations (P<.001) were observed between reasons for discontinued usage and perception of Tinnitus Talk. Several reasons for discontinued usage were associated with the examined dimensions of perception of Tinnitus Talk (usefulness, content, community, as well as quality of members' posts). Moreover, significant correlations (P<.001) between age and reasons for discontinued use were found. Older age was associated with no longer using Tinnitus Talk because of not finding what they were looking for. In addition, older participants had a generally less positive perception of Tinnitus Talk than younger participants (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study contributes to understanding the reasons for discontinued usage of online self-help platforms, which are typically only reported according to the dropout rates. Furthermore, specific groups of users who did not benefit from Tinnitus Talk were identified, and several practical implications for improvement of the structure, content, and goals of Tinnitus Talk were suggested.
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 | 0.012 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".