The use of online methods to recruit and follow a hard-to-reach population in the Peer Alternatives for Addiction Study 2021 Cohort.

Zemore SE, Delk J, Mericle AA, Martinez P, Timko C. The use of online methods to recruit and follow a hard-to-reach population in the Peer Alternatives for Addiction Study 2021 Cohort. Alcohol, clinical & experimental research. 2024 Sep 1; 48(9):1795-1806.

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/dimensions/

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.    Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions

Search for Abstract from PubMed

---

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Although studies are increasingly adopting online protocols, few such studies in the addiction field have comprehensively described their data review procedures and successes in detecting low-quality/fraudulent data. The current study describes data collection protocols and outcomes of a large, longitudinal study (the PAL Study 2021) that implemented online design elements to study individuals seeking peer support for an alcohol use disorder. METHODS: In 2021, the PAL Study collaborated with mutual-help group (MHG) partners and recovery-related organizations to recruit individuals attending a 12-step group, Women for Sobriety (WFS), LifeRing Secular Recovery, and/or SMART Recovery for an alcohol problem in-person and/or online in the prior 30?days. Participation was solicited both online and in-person. Individuals accessed baseline surveys via an open web link; follow-ups occurred at 6 and 12?months. Analyses included calculating the proportion of surveys eliminated in data quality review; comparing MHG subsamples to internal survey (benchmark) data for Alcoholics Anonymous (AA), WFS, LifeRing, and SMART; and examining response rates and attrition. RESULTS: Although 93% of respondents who opened the baseline survey completed it, 87% of baseline surveys were eliminated in data quality review (final N? = 531). Nonetheless, cleaned MHG subsamples were generally similar to benchmark samples on gender, age, race/ethnicity, and education. Follow-up rates for the cleaned sample were 88% (6?months) and 85% (12?months). Analyses revealed some differences in attrition by gender, primary MHG, and lifetime drug problems, but there was no evidence of greater attrition among those in earlier/less stable recovery. CONCLUSIONS: Study methods appear to have produced a valid, largely representative sample of the hard-to-reach target population that was successfully followed across 12?months. However, given the high survey elimination rate and need for extensive data review, we recommend that researchers avoid open-link designs and include comprehensive data review when incorporating online design elements.