BACKGROUND: With the growing use of Internet-based interventions, strategies are needed to encourage broader participation. This study examined the effects of combinations of monetary incentives and mailing characteristics on enrollment, retention, and cost effectiveness for an online health program. METHODS: In 2004, a recruitment letter was mailed to randomly selected Midwestern integrated health system members aged 21-65 and stratified by gender and race/ethnicity; recipients were randomly pre-assigned to one of 24 combinations of incentives and various mailing characteristics. Enrollment and 3-month retention rates were measured by completion of online surveys. Analysis, completed in 2005, compared enrollment and retention factors using t tests and chi-square tests. Multivariate logistic regression modeling assessed the probability of enrollment and retention. RESULTS: Of 12,289 subjects, 531 (4.3%) enrolled online, ranging from 1% to 11% by incentive combination. Highest enrollment occurred with unconditional incentives, and responses varied by gender. Retention rates ranged from 0% to 100%, with highest retention linked to higher-value incentives. The combination of a $2 bill prepaid incentive and the promise of $20 for retention (10% enrollment and 71% retention) was optimal, considering per-subject recruitment costs ($32 enrollment, $70 retention) and equivalent enrollment by gender and race/ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS: Cash incentives improved enrollment in an online health program. Men and women responded differently to mailing characteristics and incentives. Including a small prepaid monetary incentive ($2 or $5) and revealing the higher promised-retention incentive was cost effective and boosted enrollment.
BACKGROUND: With the growing use of Internet-based interventions, strategies are needed to encourage broader participation. This study examined the effects of combinations of monetary incentives and mailing characteristics on enrollment, retention, and cost effectiveness for an online health program. METHODS: In 2004, a recruitment letter was mailed to randomly selected Midwestern integrated health system members aged 21-65 and stratified by gender and race/ethnicity; recipients were randomly pre-assigned to one of 24 combinations of incentives and various mailing characteristics. Enrollment and 3-month retention rates were measured by completion of online surveys. Analysis, completed in 2005, compared enrollment and retention factors using t tests and chi-square tests. Multivariate logistic regression modeling assessed the probability of enrollment and retention. RESULTS: Of 12,289 subjects, 531 (4.3%) enrolled online, ranging from 1% to 11% by incentive combination. Highest enrollment occurred with unconditional incentives, and responses varied by gender. Retention rates ranged from 0% to 100%, with highest retention linked to higher-value incentives. The combination of a $2 bill prepaid incentive and the promise of $20 for retention (10% enrollment and 71% retention) was optimal, considering per-subject recruitment costs ($32 enrollment, $70 retention) and equivalent enrollment by gender and race/ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS: Cash incentives improved enrollment in an online health program. Men and women responded differently to mailing characteristics and incentives. Including a small prepaid monetary incentive ($2 or $5) and revealing the higher promised-retention incentive was cost effective and boosted enrollment.
Authors: Michele Morin Doody; Alice S Sigurdson; Diane Kampa; Kathleen Chimes; Bruce H Alexander; Elaine Ron; Robert E Tarone; Martha S Linet Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2003-04-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Edward H Wagner; Sarah M Greene; Gene Hart; Terry S Field; Suzanne Fletcher; Ann M Geiger; Lisa J Herrinton; Mark C Hornbrook; Christine C Johnson; Judy Mouchawar; Sharon J Rolnick; Victor J Stevens; Stephen H Taplin; Dennis Tolsma; Thomas M Vogt Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr Date: 2005
Authors: R Foy; J Parry; A Duggan; B Delaney; S Wilson; N Th Lewin-Van Den Broek; A Lassen; L Vickers; P Myres Journal: Fam Pract Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 2.267
Authors: Frances Griffiths; Antje Lindenmeyer; John Powell; Pam Lowe; Margaret Thorogood Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2006-06-23 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Chanita Hughes Halbert; Shiriki Kumanyika; Marjorie Bowman; Scarlett L Bellamy; Vanessa Briggs; Stacey Brown; Brenda Bryant; Ernestine Delmoor; Joseph C Johnson; Joseph Purnell; Rodney Rogers; Benita Weathers Journal: Health Educ Res Date: 2009-10-29
Authors: Resa M Jones; Steven H Woolf; Tina D Cunningham; Robert E Johnson; Alex H Krist; Stephen F Rothemich; Sally W Vernon Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2010-03-28 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Catharine Wang; Erynn S Gordon; Catharine B Stack; Ching-Ti Liu; Tricia Norkunas; Lisa Wawak; Michael F Christman; Robert C Green; Deborah J Bowen Journal: Clin Trials Date: 2013-11-11 Impact factor: 2.486
Authors: Gwen L Alexander; Jennifer B McClure; Josephine H Calvi; George W Divine; Melanie A Stopponi; Sharon J Rolnick; Jerianne Heimendinger; Dennis D Tolsma; Kenneth Resnicow; Marci K Campbell; Victor J Strecher; Christine Cole Johnson Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2009-12-17 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Leonor Corsino; Pao-Hwa Lin; Bryan C Batch; Stephen Intille; Steven C Grambow; Hayden B Bosworth; Gary G Bennett; Crystal Tyson; Laura P Svetkey; Corrine I Voils Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2013-04-13 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Annette E Maxwell; Roshan Bastani; Beth A Glenn; Cynthia M Mojica; L Cindy Chang Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2009-09-15 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Morgan M Millar; Anita Y Kinney; Nicola J Camp; Lisa A Cannon-Albright; Mia Hashibe; David F Penson; Anne C Kirchhoff; Deborah W Neklason; Alicia W Gilsenan; Gretchen S Dieck; Antoinette M Stroup; Sandra L Edwards; Carrie Bateman; Marjorie E Carter; Carol Sweeney Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2019-05-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Melanie A Stopponi; Gwen L Alexander; Jennifer B McClure; Nikki M Carroll; George W Divine; Josephine H Calvi; Sharon J Rolnick; Victor J Strecher; Christine Cole Johnson; Debra P Ritzwoller Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2009-08-26 Impact factor: 5.428