Comparison of Different Recruitment Methods for Sexual and Reproductive Health Research: Social Media–Based Versus Conventional Methods

Background: Prior research about the sexual and reproductive health of young women has relied mostly on self-reported survey studies. Thus, participant recruitment using Web-based methods can improve sexual and reproductive health research about cervical cancer prevention. In our prior study, we reported that Facebook is a promising way to reach young women for sexual and reproductive health research. However, it remains unknown whether Web-based or other conventional recruitment methods (ie, face-to-face or flyer distribution) yield comparable survey responses from similar participants. Objective: We conducted a survey to determine whether there was a difference in the sexual and reproductive health survey responses of young Japanese women based on recruitment methods: social media–based and conventional methods. Methods: From July 2012 to March 2013 (9 months), we invited women of ages 16-35 years in Kanagawa, Japan, to complete a Web-based questionnaire. They were recruited through either a social media–based (social networking site, SNS, group) or by conventional methods (conventional group). All participants enrolled were required to fill out and submit their responses through a Web-based questionnaire about their sexual and reproductive health for cervical cancer prevention. Results: Of the 243 participants, 52.3% (127/243) were recruited by SNS, whereas 47.7% (116/243) were recruited by conventional methods. We found no differences between recruitment methods in responses to behaviors and attitudes to sexual and reproductive health survey, although more participants from the conventional group (15%, 14/95) chose not to answer the age of first intercourse compared with those from the SNS group (5.2%, 6/116; P=.03). Conclusions: No differences were found between recruitment methods in the responses of young Japanese women to a Web–based sexual and reproductive health survey.
Journal of Medical Internet Research

Frugal innovation, sustainable innovation, reverse innovation: why do they look alike? Why are they different?

  Biowebspin, September 21th, 2016

Frugal innovation, sustainable innovation, reverse innovation: why do they look alike? Why are they different?

by Christian Le Bas in Journal of Innovation Economics & Management, 2016

This paper is about three types of innovation that are emerging in the landscape of innovation studies: frugal innovation (FI), sustainable innovation (SI) and reverse innovation (RI).

The three types of innovation under observation are basically concerned with economic development and growth. There is a unifying feature, in that developing economies are at the source of two of the three: frugal innovation and reverse innovation. Moreover, the third, sustainable innovation, also has many implications for development and firm strategy in emerging economies. In other words, globalisation is at the forefront. We define, characterise, and discuss the role of these types of innovation. We examine the likely linkages that exist between them. We place the emphasis on the original characteristics supported by these very recent types of innovation. These fit well with the constraints arising in the new context, both in developed and developing countries, in particular with environmental concerns. In a sense they are not directly comparable to others.

  Get Full text: PDF-icon

The post Frugal innovation, sustainable innovation, reverse innovation: why do they look alike? Why are they different? appeared first on Biowebspin.

Biowebspin