Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Identifying and preventing fraudulent participation in qualitative research
  1. Kerry Woolfall
  1. Public Health Policy and Systems, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Kerry Woolfall, Public Health Policy and Systems, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L69 3GF, UK; K.Woolfall{at}liverpool.ac.uk

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Use of online platforms to widen access to child health research

Qualitative child health research provides important insight into the experiences of families and practitioners to inform our knowledge and approaches to clinical practice, policy or research design. Historically, child health researchers have recruited families via hospital or community settings using posters and leaflets through health practitioner recruitment discussions. More recently, the use of social media platforms such as Twitter, Instagram and TikTok provides opportunities to broaden the reach of research invitations to access hard-to-reach populations, such as those who may not engage with healthcare services or families from minority ethnic backgrounds who are often under-represented in research. Social media adverts can be set up quickly. Standard adverts are free, with options to pay for platforms like Twitter to promote or target a specific demographic or hard-to-reach population. During the COVID-19 pandemic, interviews via online platforms such as Zoom or Microsoft Teams meant that qualitative research could be conducted during lockdowns and continues to be a popular method, particularly among parents of young children due to their convenience.

Despite potential benefits, those using online platforms for qualitative research recruitment have noted a significant increase in people or ‘bots’ faking their eligibility to participate. As highlighted by O’Donnell et al 1 in their letter on ‘fraudulent participants in qualitative child health research’, this issue can be extensive. This editorial draws upon the limited literature and personal experience of identifying and preventing fraudulent participation in qualitative health research.

Fraudulent participation in qualitative research

O’Donnell’s UK-wide research group identified that in one study, 385/483 (80%) of those …

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Twitter @kerry_woolfall

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.