Search

OBJECTIVE: Summaries of health research can be a complementary way to return value to participants. We assess how research participants engage with summaries via email communication and how this can be improved. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We look at correlations between demographic subgroups and engagement in a longitudinal dataset of 305 626 participants (77% are classified as underrepresented in biomedical research) from the All of Us Research Program. We compare this against engagement with other program communications and use impact evaluations (N = 421 510) to measure the effect of tailoring communication by (1) eliciting content preferences, (2) Spanish focused content, (3) informational videos, and (4) article content in the email subject line. RESULTS: Between March 2020 and October 2021, research summaries reached 67% of enrolled participants, outperforming other program communication (60%) and return of results (31%), which have a high uptake rate but have been extended to a subset of eligible participants. While all demographic subgroups engage with research summaries, participants with higher income, educational attainment, White, and older than 45 years open and click content most often. Surfacing article content in the email subject line and Spanish focused content had negative effects on engagement. Video and social media content and eliciting preferences led to a small directional increase in clicks. DISCUSSION: Further individualization of tailoring efforts may be needed to drive larger engagement effects (eg, delivering multiple articles in line with stated preferences, expanding preference options). Our findings are likely a conservative representation of engagement effects, given the coarseness of our click rate measure. CONCLUSIONS: Health research summaries show promise as a way to return value to research participants, especially if individual-level results cannot be returned. Personalization of communication requires testing to determine whether efforts are having the expected effect.

Objective Summaries of health research can be a complementary way to return value to participants. We assess how research participants engage with summaries via email communication and how this can be improved. Materials and Methods We look at correlations between demographic subgroups and engagement in a longitudinal dataset of 305 626 participants (77% are classified as underrepresented in biomedical research) from the All of Us Research Program. We compare this against engagement with other program communications and use impact evaluations (N = 421 510) to measure the effect of tailoring communication by (1) eliciting content preferences, (2) Spanish focused content, (3) informational videos, and (4) article content in the email subject line. Results Between March 2020 and October 2021, research summaries reached 67% of enrolled participants, outperforming other program communication (60%) and return of results (31%), which have a high uptake rate but have been extended to a subset of eligible participants. While all demographic subgroups engage with research summaries, participants with higher income, educational attainment, White, and older than 45 years open and click content most often. Surfacing article content in the email subject line and Spanish focused content had negative effects on engagement. Video and social media content and eliciting preferences led to a small directional increase in clicks. Discussion Further individualization of tailoring efforts may be needed to drive larger engagement effects (eg, delivering multiple articles in line with stated preferences, expanding preference options). Our findings are likely a conservative representation of engagement effects, given the coarseness of our click rate measure. Conclusions Health research summaries show promise as a way to return value to research participants, especially if individual-level results cannot be returned. Personalization of communication requires testing to determine whether efforts are having the expected effect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Summaries of health research can be a complementary way to return value to participants. We assess how research participants engage with summaries via email communication and how this can be improved., Materials and Methods: We look at correlations between demographic subgroups and engagement in a longitudinal dataset of 305 626 participants (77% are classified as underrepresented in biomedical research) from the All of Us Research Program. We compare this against engagement with other program communications and use impact evaluations (N = 421 510) to measure the effect of tailoring communication by (1) eliciting content preferences, (2) Spanish focused content, (3) informational videos, and (4) article content in the email subject line., Results: Between March 2020 and October 2021, research summaries reached 67% of enrolled participants, outperforming other program communication (60%) and return of results (31%), which have a high uptake rate but have been extended to a subset of eligible participants. While all demographic subgroups engage with research summaries, participants with higher income, educational attainment, White, and older than 45 years open and click content most often. Surfacing article content in the email subject line and Spanish focused content had negative effects on engagement. Video and social media content and eliciting preferences led to a small directional increase in clicks., Discussion: Further individualization of tailoring efforts may be needed to drive larger engagement effects (eg, delivering multiple articles in line with stated preferences, expanding preference options). Our findings are likely a conservative representation of engagement effects, given the coarseness of our click rate measure., Conclusions: Health research summaries show promise as a way to return value to research participants, especially if individual-level results cannot be returned. Personalization of communication requires testing to determine whether efforts are having the expected effect., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association.)