MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402830010 · doi:10.2196/58771

Dropout in a Longitudinal Survey of Amazon Mechanical Turk Workers With Low Back Pain: Observational Study

2024· article· en· W4402830010 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nabeel Qureshi, Ron D. Hays, Patricia M. Herman

Bibliographic record

VenueInteractive Journal of Medical Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Crowdsensing and Crowdsourcing
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Complementary and Integrative Health
KeywordsPreprintObservational studyAmazon rainforestDrop (telecommunication)Drop outSurvey researchPsychologyMedicineEngineeringComputer scienceWorld Wide WebApplied psychologyMechanical engineeringEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Surveys of internet panels such as Amazon's Mechanical Turk (MTurk) are common in health research. Nonresponse in longitudinal studies can limit inferences about change over time. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to (1) describe the patterns of survey responses and nonresponse among MTurk members with back pain, (2) identify factors associated with survey response over time, (3) assess the impact of nonresponse on sample characteristics, and (4) assess how well inverse probability weighting can account for differences in sample composition. METHODS: We surveyed adult MTurk workers who identified as having back pain. We report participation trends over 3 survey waves and use stepwise logistic regression to identify factors related to survey participation in successive waves. RESULTS: A total of 1678 adults participated in wave 1. Of those, 983 (59%) participated in wave 2 and 703 (42%) in wave 3. Participants who did not drop out took less time to complete previous surveys (30 min vs 35 min in wave 1, P<.001; 24 min vs 26 min in wave 2, P=.02) and reported having fewer health conditions (5.88 vs 6.6, P<.001). In multivariate models predicting responding at wave 2, lower odds of participation were associated with more time to complete the baseline survey (odds ratio [OR] 0.98, 95% CI 0.97-0.99), being Hispanic (compared with non-Hispanic, OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.49-0.96), having a bachelor's degree as their terminal degree (compared with all other levels of education, OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.46-0.73), having more pain interference and intensity (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.64-0.89), and having more health conditions. In contrast, older respondents (older than 45 years age compared with 18-24 years age) were more likely to respond to the wave 2 survey (OR 2.63 and 3.79, respectively) and those whose marital status was divorced (OR 1.81) and separated (OR 1.77) were also more likely to respond to the wave 2 survey. Weighted analysis showed slight differences in sample demographics and conditions and larger differences in pain assessments, particularly for those who responded to wave 2. CONCLUSIONS: Longitudinal studies on MTurk have large, differential dropouts between waves. This study provided information about the individuals more likely to drop out over time, which can help researchers prepare for future surveys.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.170
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.274 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInteractive Journal of Medical ResearchSame topicMobile Crowdsensing and CrowdsourcingFrench-language works237,207