Skip to main content
. 2016 Dec 1;7(2):157–165. doi: 10.1007/s13142-016-0450-4

Table 2.

Overview of feasibility and effectiveness of recruitment by message frame

Feasibility Effectiveness
Message type Messages sent Cancelleda % Cancelled (95% CI)b Interested % Interested (95% CI)c Enrolled % Enrolled (95% CI)d % of smokers enrolled (estimate)e
Free 2580 60 2.33% (1.78–2.98%) 232 8.99% (7.92–10.16%) 46 1.78% (1.31–2.37%) 17.48%
Empathy 4871 39 1.31% (0.94–1.79%) 505 10.37% (9.53–11.26%) 97 1.99% (1.62–2.42%) 19.52%
Pride 2743 33 1.78% (1.23–2.49%) 301 10.97%f (9.83–12.20%) 56 2.04% (1.55–2.64%) 20.02%
Total 10,194 132 1.78% (1.49–2.11%) 1038 10.18% (9.60–10.79%) 199 1.95% (1.69–2.24%) 19.14%

aDays when Text4baby subscribers were sent another ad hoc or topical module message were excluded. The total excludes November 3, 2015; December 8, 2015; and January 26, 2016

bThe number of “STOP” text responses among the number of recruitment messages sent on the days Text4baby subscribers received the recruitment message only (free messages sent = 2580, empathy messages sent = 2968, and pride messages sent = 1855; total n = 7403)

cThe number of “YES” text responses among the number of recruitment messages sent

dThe number enrolled in the trial among the number of recruitment messages sent

eThe number enrolled in the trial among an estimated 10.2% of smokers who were sent a recruitment message

fFisher’s exact test two-tailed p value is <0.05 where empathy and pride messages were compared to the free message