Reminders

Do reminders really cut no-shows?

Yes. This is one of the best-tested ideas in local marketing. Across healthcare trials, reminders made people about 23% more likely to attend and cut no-shows by about a quarter, and more than one reminder beat a single one. Wording matters: telling people what a missed appointment costs cut no-shows further. Outside healthcare, reminders brought people back to the dentist and raised gym visits. Most of the evidence is from healthcare, and extra late reminders add little.

What to do

Send a reminder the day before and a short nudge on the day.
Say what you’ve reserved for them, like “60 minutes with your stylist”.
Send “you’re due” reminders for recurring services.
Stop at one or two reminders.

What the research says

Peer-reviewed or officialOlder study
Mobile phone messaging reminders for attendance at healthcare appointments
Gurol-Urganci et al., Cochrane 2013
SMS reminders raised attendance (RR 1.14). Attendance was 67.8% with no reminder against 78.6% with SMS, about as effective as phone calls and cheaper.
What it means for you: A simple text reminder raises attendance about as much as a staff phone call, for less.
Keep in mind: Healthcare appointments; the review rates the evidence as moderate quality.
Method and quote
Systematic review of 8 RCTs (6,615 participants).
“mobile text message reminders improved the rate of attendance at healthcare appointments compared to no reminders (risk ratio (RR) 1.14 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03 to 1.26))… attendance to appointment rates were 67.8% for the no reminders group, 78.6% for the mobile phone messaging reminders group".”
Read the source
Peer-reviewed or official
Using digital notifications to improve attendance in clinic
Robotham et al., BMJ Open 2016
Notified patients were 23% more likely to attend and 25% less likely to no-show (15% against 21%). Multiple notifications beat a single one.
What it means for you: Reminders cut no-shows by about a quarter, and more than one reminder beats a single one.
Keep in mind: Healthcare. Voice reminders looked more effective than text in this review.
Method and quote
Systematic review and meta-analysis. 26 studies, 21 in the primary meta-analysis (8,345 notified against 7,731 not), including 7 from Asia.
“Patients who received notifications were 23% more likely to attend clinic than those who received no notification (risk ratio=1.23, 67% vs 54%). Those receiving notifications were 25% less likely to 'no show' for appointments (risk ratio=.75, 15% vs 21%)." The review adds: "Multiple notifications were significantly more effective at improving attendance than single notifications.”
Read the source
Peer-reviewed or official
Stating Appointment Costs in SMS Reminders Reduces Missed Hospital Appointments
Hallsworth et al., PLOS ONE 2015
Telling patients what a missed appointment costs cut the no-show rate from 11.1% to 8.4%.
What it means for you: Wording matters: telling people what a missed appointment costs cut no-shows further.
Keep in mind: One UK hospital, where only one in five patients had a usable phone number.
Method and quote
Two RCTs at an NHS trust in England (10,111 and 9,848 participants, 2013–2014).
“a message including the cost of a missed appointment to the health system produced a DNA rate of 8.4%, compared to 11.1% for the existing message (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.61-0.89, P<0.01).”
Read the source
Peer-reviewed or officialOlder study
Nudges at the dentist
Altmann & Traxler, European Economic Review 2014
A reminder postcard more than doubled the share of due patients who booked a check-up within a month. Adding extra information did not help further.
What it means for you: “You’re due” reminders bring people back for recurring services.
Keep in mind: Postcards at dental practices in Europe, not WhatsApp.
Method and quote
Field experiment with dental patients due for a check-up, randomized to no reminder, a neutral reminder postcard, or reminders with extra information.
“Within one month after receiving a reminder, the fraction of patients who make a check-up appointment more than doubles… Including additional information in the reminders does not significantly increase response rates relative to the neutral reminder.”
Read the source
Peer-reviewed or official
Experimental evidence of limited attention at the gym
Habla & Müller, Experimental Economics 2021
Weekly email reminders raised gym visits by 13% (19% for classes), raised class bookings and slightly reduced cancellations.
What it means for you: Light weekly nudges raise gym visits and class bookings.
Keep in mind: One field experiment, with no effect on renewals.
Method and quote
Randomized field experiment with gym members, including a three-month post-treatment period.
“weekly email reminders, increases the weekly exercising frequency of gym members by 13%, with the effect being larger for class training (19%) than for free training (11%).”
Read the source
Peer-reviewed or official
Getting to the Top of Mind: How Reminders Increase Saving
Karlan, McConnell, Mullainathan & Zinman, Management Science 2016
Reminder content matters. Messages that mention the customer's own goal plus an incentive work best, and extra late reminders add nothing.
What it means for you: Reminders work best when they mention the customer’s own goal, and extra late reminders add nothing.
Keep in mind: Banking and savings, not shops.
Method and quote
Randomized field experiments at three banks, sending reminder messages to clients who had recently opened commitment-savings accounts.
“Messages that mention both savings goals and financial incentives are particularly effective, whereas other content variations such as gain versus loss framing do not have significantly different effects. Nor do we find evidence that receiving additional late reminders has an additive effect.”
Read the source

What cuts the other way

Research that complicates the picture, and what to take from it.

Peer-reviewed or official
Dynamically Managing a Profitable Email Marketing Program
Zhang, Kumar & Cosguner, JMR 2017
Message volume has a nonlinear effect. Sending 10 emails instead of the optimal 7 cost 16% of lifetime profit per customer, and sending 4 cost 32%.
What it means for you: There’s a sweet spot: both too many messages and too few cost money.
Keep in mind: Email at one retailer; the best frequency differs by business.
Method and quote
A US home-improvement retailer's email and purchase data, using a hidden Markov and copula model with counterfactuals.
“sending four (ten) emails instead of the optimal number of seven emails can cause the retailer to lose 32% (16%) of its lifetime profit per customer.”
Read the source