Comparing the Recruitment of Research Participants With Chronic Low Back Pain Using Amazon Mechanical Turk With the Recruitment of Patients From Chiropractic Clinics: A Quasi-Experimental Study
- PMID: 35728997
- PMCID: PMC11238473
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2022.02.004
Comparing the Recruitment of Research Participants With Chronic Low Back Pain Using Amazon Mechanical Turk With the Recruitment of Patients From Chiropractic Clinics: A Quasi-Experimental Study
Abstract
Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the crowdsourcing platform Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) with in-person recruitment and web-based surveys as a method to (1) recruit study participants and (2) obtain low-cost data quickly from chiropractic patients with chronic low back pain in the United States.
Methods: In this 2-arm quasi-experimental study, we used in-person clinical sampling and web-based surveys from a separate study (RAND sample, n = 1677, data collected October 2016 to January 2017) compared with MTurk (n = 310, data collected November 2016) as a sampling and data collection tool. We gathered patient-reported health outcomes and other characteristics of adults with chronic low back pain receiving chiropractic care. Parametric and nonparametric tests were run. We assessed statistical and practical differences based on P values and effect sizes, respectively.
Results: Compared with the RAND sample, the MTurk sample was statistically significantly younger (mean age 35.4 years, SD 9.7 vs 48.9, SD 14.8), made less money (24% vs 17% reported less than $30,000 annual income), and reported worst mental health than the RAND sample. Other differences were that the MTurk sample had more men (37% vs 29%), fewer White patients (87% vs 92%), more Hispanic patients (9% vs 5%), fewer people with a college degree (59% vs 68%), and patients were more likely to be working full time (62% vs 58%). The MTurk sample was more likely to have chronic low back pain (78% vs 66%) that differed in pain frequency and duration. The MTurk sample had less disability and better global health scores. In terms of efficiency, the surveys cost $2.50 per participant in incentives for the MTurk sample. Survey development took 2 weeks and data collection took 1 month.
Conclusion: Our results suggest that there may be differences between crowdsourcing and a clinic-based sample. These differences range from small to medium on demographics and self-reported health. The low incentive costs and rapid data collection of MTurk makes it an economically viable method of collecting data from chiropractic patients with low back pain. Further research is needed to explore the utility of MTurk for recruiting clinical samples, such as comparisons to nationally representative samples.
Keywords: Back Pain; Chiropractic; Crowdsourcing; Spine.
Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Conflict of interest statement
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
No conflicts of interest were reported for this study.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Effects of Excluding Those Who Report Having "Syndomitis" or "Chekalism" on Data Quality: Longitudinal Health Survey of a Sample From Amazon's Mechanical Turk.J Med Internet Res. 2023 Aug 4;25:e46421. doi: 10.2196/46421. J Med Internet Res. 2023. PMID: 37540543 Free PMC article.
-
The Promise and Pitfalls of Using Crowdsourcing in Research Prioritization for Back Pain: Cross-Sectional Surveys.J Med Internet Res. 2017 Oct 6;19(10):e341. doi: 10.2196/jmir.8821. J Med Internet Res. 2017. PMID: 28986339 Free PMC article.
-
The Benefits of Crowdsourcing to Seed and Align an Algorithm in an mHealth Intervention for African American and Hispanic Adults: Survey Study.J Med Internet Res. 2022 Jun 21;24(6):e30216. doi: 10.2196/30216. J Med Internet Res. 2022. PMID: 35727616 Free PMC article.
-
Concerns and recommendations for using Amazon MTurk for eating disorder research.Int J Eat Disord. 2022 Feb;55(2):263-272. doi: 10.1002/eat.23614. Epub 2021 Sep 25. Int J Eat Disord. 2022. PMID: 34562036 Free PMC article. Review.
-
The use of crowdsourcing in addiction science research: Amazon Mechanical Turk.Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2019 Feb;27(1):1-18. doi: 10.1037/pha0000235. Epub 2018 Nov 29. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2019. PMID: 30489114 Review.
Cited by
-
Effects of Excluding Those Who Report Having "Syndomitis" or "Chekalism" on Data Quality: Longitudinal Health Survey of a Sample From Amazon's Mechanical Turk.J Med Internet Res. 2023 Aug 4;25:e46421. doi: 10.2196/46421. J Med Internet Res. 2023. PMID: 37540543 Free PMC article.
-
Exploring Novel Innovation Strategies to Close a Technology Gap in Neurosurgery: HORAO Crowdsourcing Campaign.J Med Internet Res. 2023 Apr 28;25:e42723. doi: 10.2196/42723. J Med Internet Res. 2023. PMID: 37115612 Free PMC article.
-
Dropout in a Longitudinal Survey of Amazon Mechanical Turk Workers With Low Back Pain: Observational Study.Interact J Med Res. 2024 Nov 11;13:e58771. doi: 10.2196/58771. Interact J Med Res. 2024. PMID: 39527103 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Sheehan KB. Crowdsourcing research: Data collection with Amazon’s Mechanical Turk. Communication Monographs. 2018;85(1):140–156.
-
- Mason W, Suri S. Conducting behavioral research on Amazon’s Mechanical Turk. Behav Res Methods. 2011;30:1–23. - PubMed
-
- Shapiro DN, Chandler J, Mueller PA. Using Mechanical Turk to Study Clinical Populations. Clinical Psychology Science. 2013;1(2):213–220.
-
- Galton F. Vox populi. Nature. 1907;75(7):450–451.