Finding people who will tell you their thoughts on genomics—recruitment strategies for social sciences research

[1]  H. Skirton,et al.  Can I get a retweet please? Health research recruitment and the Twittersphere. , 2014, Journal of advanced nursing.

[2]  A. Middleton,et al.  Online questionnaire development: Using film to engage participants and then gather attitudes towards the sharing of genomic data☆ , 2014, Social science research.

[3]  Caroline F. Wright,et al.  DECIPHER: database for the interpretation of phenotype-linked plausibly pathogenic sequence and copy-number variation , 2013, Nucleic Acids Res..

[4]  Aaron Smith,et al.  72% of online adults are social networking site users , 2013 .

[5]  M. Hurles,et al.  Empirical research on the ethics of genomic research , 2013, American journal of medical genetics. Part A.

[6]  W. Chung,et al.  Researchers’ views on return of incidental genomic research results: qualitative and quantitative findings , 2013, Genetics in Medicine.

[7]  D. Bianchi,et al.  The Role of Social Networking Sites in Medical Genetics Research , 2013, American journal of medical genetics. Part A.

[8]  R. Eeles,et al.  Reproductive decision-making in young female carriers of a BRCA mutation. , 2013, Human reproduction.

[9]  P. Gregersen,et al.  Beliefs and attitudes towards participating in genetic research – a population based cross-sectional study , 2013, BMC Public Health.

[10]  C. Strahlendorf,et al.  Attitudes of Canadian researchers toward the return to participants of incidental and targeted genomic findings obtained in a pediatric research setting , 2013, Genetics in Medicine.

[11]  Barbara Lohse,et al.  Facebook is an effective strategy to recruit low-income women to online nutrition education. , 2013, Journal of nutrition education and behavior.

[12]  Nancy R. Downing,et al.  Genetics specialists' perspectives on disclosure of genomic incidental findings in the clinical setting. , 2013, Patient education and counseling.

[13]  F. Rousseau,et al.  “I want to know what's in Pandora's box”: Comparing stakeholder perspectives on incidental findings in clinical whole genomic sequencing , 2012, American journal of medical genetics. Part A.

[14]  S. Sharif,et al.  Attitudes towards prenatal testing and termination of pregnancy in British Pakistani parents and relatives of children with recessive conditions in the UK , 2012, Prenatal diagnosis.

[15]  B. Wilfond,et al.  The Experience of Families With Children With Trisomy 13 and 18 in Social Networks , 2012, Pediatrics.

[16]  Julianne M. O’Daniel,et al.  Public perspectives about pharmacogenetic testing and managing ancillary findings. , 2012, Genetic testing and molecular biomarkers.

[17]  B. Ness,et al.  Return of individual research results and incidental findings in the clinical trials cooperative group setting , 2012, Genetics in Medicine.

[18]  Danielle E. Ramo,et al.  Broad Reach and Targeted Recruitment Using Facebook for an Online Survey of Young Adult Substance Use , 2012, Journal of medical Internet research.

[19]  H. Firth,et al.  The Deciphering Developmental Disorders (DDD) study , 2011, Developmental medicine and child neurology.

[20]  B. Bernhardt,et al.  The General Public’s Understanding and Perception of Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Test Results , 2011, Public Health Genomics.

[21]  Barbara Prainsack,et al.  A Survey of UK Public Interest in Internet-Based Personal Genome Testing , 2010, PloS one.

[22]  S. Friedman,et al.  High risk men's perceptions of pre-implantation genetic diagnosis for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. , 2010, Human reproduction.

[23]  P. Mitchell,et al.  Public interest in predictive genetic testing, including direct-to-consumer testing, for susceptibility to major depression: preliminary findings , 2010, European Journal of Human Genetics.

[24]  Tao Wang,et al.  Social Networkers' Attitudes Toward Direct-to-Consumer Personal Genome Testing , 2009, The American journal of bioethics : AJOB.

[25]  Azure B. Thompson,et al.  An Exploration of Attitudes Among Black Americans Towards Psychiatric Genetic Research , 2009, Psychiatry.

[26]  Deryck Houghton,et al.  Blogging and Other Social Media , 2008 .

[27]  Grinell Smith.  Does Gender Influence Online Survey Participation? A Record-Linkage Analysis of University Faculty Online Survey Response Behavior. , 2008 .

[28]  Andreas D. Baxevanis,et al.  Searching Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man (OMIM) for Information for Genetic Loci Involved in Human Disease , 2002, Current protocols in human genetics.

[29]  K. Warriner,et al.  Evaluating Socio-economic Status (SES) Bias in Survey Nonresponse , 2002 .

[30]  E. Singer,et al.  Leverage-saliency theory of survey participation: description and an illustration. , 2000, Public opinion quarterly.

[31]  E. Singer,et al.  Experiments with incentives in telephone surveys. , 2000, Public opinion quarterly.

[32]  E. Singer,et al.  The effects of response rate changes on the index of consumer sentiment. , 2000, Public opinion quarterly.