Final Research Report
View this project's final research report.
Related Journal Citations
Peer review of PCORI-funded research helps make sure the report presents complete, balanced, and useful information about the research. It also assesses how the project addressed PCORI’s Methodology Standards. During peer review, experts read a draft report of the research and provide comments about the report. These experts may include a scientist focused on the research topic, a specialist in research methods, a patient or caregiver, and a healthcare professional. These reviewers cannot have conflicts of interest with the study.
The peer reviewers point out where the draft report may need revision. For example, they may suggest ways to improve descriptions of the conduct of the study or to clarify the connection between results and conclusions. Sometimes, awardees revise their draft reports twice or more to address all of the reviewers’ comments.
Peer reviewers commented and the researchers made changes or provided responses. Those comments and responses included the following:
- The reviewers questioned the study conclusions because the study design included a nonrandomized participant cohort recruited by their peers, potentially biasing the results. The reviewers went on to suggest the possibility that motivation to quit smoking was high among the peer-recruited individuals not because of the peer recruitment tools used but because those recruited were asked by someone they knew. The researchers acknowledged the potential bias by adding the concern to their study limitations. They also added comments in the report indicating that just being recruited by their peers could add to individuals’ motivation to quit smoking.
- The reviewers noted that the researchers’ first aim was to reach and recruit a greater proportion of African American smokers than typically participated in research studies, but there were no strategies implemented to target their recruitment. The reviewers asked for more information on how the researchers tried to engage African American smokers to participate in the study. The researchers stated that they did not make any additional efforts to recruit African American smokers beyond the use of the peer recruitment materials. They just counted on repeating the success of their pilot study in recruiting African American smokers. The researchers also acknowledged that one strategy that might have helped recruit hard-to-reach populations—providing incentives for peer recruitment—had been dropped early on because of concerns that such a practice would not be sustainable in a real-world implementation of the intervention.
Conflict of Interest Disclosures
- Has Results