Ruby Emma, Ramlawi Serine, Bowie Alexa Clare, Boyd Stephanie, Dingwall-Harvey Alysha, Rennicks White Ruth, El-Chaâr Darine, Walker Mark
Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
J Med Internet Res. 2025 Jan 20;27:e58450. doi: 10.2196/58450.
Current literature is unclear on the safety and optimal timing of delivery for pregnant individuals with gestational diabetes mellitus, which inspired our study team to conduct a web-based survey study exploring patient and provider opinions on delivery options. However, an incident of fraudulent activity with survey responses prompted a shift in the focus of the research project. Unfortunately, despite the significant rise of web-based surveys used in medical research, there remains very limited evidence on the implications of and optimal methods to handle fraudulent web-based survey responses. Therefore, the objective of this viewpoint paper was to highlight our approach to identifying fraudulent responses in a web-based survey study, in the context of clinical perinatal research exploring patient and provider opinions on delivery options for pregnancies with gestational diabetes mellitus. Initially, we conducted cross-sectional web-based surveys across Canada with pregnant patients and perinatal health care providers. Surveys were available through Research Electronic Data Capture, and recruitment took place between March and October 2023. A change to recruitment introduced a US $5 gift card incentive to increase survey engagement. In mid-October 2023, an incident of fraudulent activity was reported, after which the surveys were deactivated. Systematic guidelines were developed by the study team in consultation with information technology services and the research ethics board to filter fraudulent from true responses. Between October 14 and 16, 2023, an influx of almost 2500 responses (393 patients and 2047 providers) was recorded in our web-based survey. Systematic filtering flagged numerous fraudulent responses. We identified fraudulent responses based on criteria including, but not limited to, identical timestamps and responses, responses with slight variations in wording and similar timestamps, and fraudulent email addresses. Therefore, the incident described in this viewpoint paper highlights the importance of preserving research integrity by using methodologically sound practices to extract true data for research findings. These fraudulent events continue to threaten the credibility of research findings and future evidence-based practices.
目前的文献对于妊娠期糖尿病孕妇分娩的安全性和最佳时机尚无定论，这促使我们的研究团队开展了一项基于网络的调查研究，以探讨患者和医疗服务提供者对分娩选择的看法。然而，调查回复中出现的一起欺诈活动事件促使研究项目的重点发生了转变。不幸的是，尽管基于网络的调查在医学研究中的使用显著增加，但关于处理欺诈性网络调查回复的影响和最佳方法的证据仍然非常有限。因此，这篇观点论文的目的是在一项临床围产期研究的背景下，突出我们在基于网络的调查研究中识别欺诈性回复的方法，该研究探讨了患者和医疗服务提供者对妊娠期糖尿病孕妇分娩选择的看法。最初，我们在加拿大对孕妇和围产期医疗保健提供者进行了基于网络的横断面调查。调查通过研究电子数据采集工具提供，招募时间为2023年3月至10月。招募方式的一项改变是引入了一张5美元的礼品卡激励措施，以提高调查参与度。2023年10月中旬，报告了一起欺诈活动事件，之后调查被停用。研究团队与信息技术服务部门和研究伦理委员会协商制定了系统的指导方针，以从真实回复中筛选出欺诈性回复。在2023年10月14日至16日期间，我们的基于网络的调查记录了近2500份回复（393名患者和2047名提供者）的大量涌入。系统筛选标记出了大量欺诈性回复。我们根据包括但不限于相同时间戳和回复、措辞略有不同且时间戳相似的回复以及欺诈性电子邮件地址等标准来识别欺诈性回复。因此，这篇观点论文中描述的事件凸显了通过采用方法合理的做法来提取真实数据以用于研究结果，从而维护研究诚信的重要性。这些欺诈事件继续威胁着研究结果的可信度以及未来基于证据的实践。
J Med Internet Res. 2024-12-16
JMIR Form Res. 2024-12-9
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-2-1
BMJ Evid Based Med. 2025-5-20
PLOS Glob Public Health. 2023-8-23
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2022-12
J Biomed Inform. 2019-5-9
JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2019-2-4
Zotero 插件