Table 3 Suggestions to protect the integrity of online research

Consider what is essential to meet ethical safeguards and data protection regulatory requirements. Is there a strong reason to remove linkage of personal and (non-sensitive) study data?

Assess the balance between study security and ease of participation. Requesting limited personal information, such as email addresses, at study entry may not reduce response rates

For surveys to specific professional groups, include a requirement, where possible, for associated email addresses. For example, as here, healthcare professionals would be required to provide health system-based emails. Whatever the participant group, ensure that checks against duplication are included from the design stage and, where possible, are automated

Attempt to visualise problematic scenarios. A single individual can exploit an existing vulnerability. What are the vulnerabilities of your study and how might they be exploited? If a problem arose, would it be possible to identify and exclude suspect data with certainty?

Regularly monitor aspects of collected data, ideally using a live dashboard. Consider unusual emerging patterns or trends; simple checking of recruitment totals may mask problems until it is too late

Examine study data to look for expected and unexpected anomalies. Consider whether procedures for identifying suspect or duplicate responses can be fully automated or if manual checks are required and schedule appropriately

Unless there is high confidence in study security, use manual rather than automated delivery of incentives

Ensure that at least one person can access study systems and extract detailed monitoring data. Rapid responses can be critical in damage limitation