A randomized trial of the impact of certified mail on response rate to a physician survey, and a cost-effectiveness analysis

Evaluation and the Health Professions

Volumn 20, Issue 4, 1997, Pages 389-406

  Del Valle, Maggi L ^a   Morgenstern, Hal ^b   Rogstad, Teresa L ^c   Albright, Carol ^d   Vickrey, Barbara G ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

^d Albright Consulting   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; GOVERNMENT; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; MEDICAL SPECIALIST; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DATA COLLECTION; HUMANS; NEUROLOGY; POSTAL SERVICE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0030663494     PISSN: 01632787     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/016327879702000402     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Bernat, J. L., Ringel, S. P., Vickrey, B. G., & Keran, C. (1997). Attitudes of U.S. neurologists about the ethical dimensions of managed care. Neurology, 49, 4-13.
2. Berry, S. H., & Kanouse, D. E. (1987). Physician response to a mailed survey: An experiment in timing of payment. Public Opinion Quarterly, 51, 102-114.
3. Greenland, S., & Robins, J. M. (1985). Estimation of a common effect parameter from sparse follow-up data. Biometrics, 41, 55-68.
4. Mantel, N., & Haenszel, W. (1959). Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 22, 719-748.
5. Mizes, J. S., Fleece, E. L., & Roos, C. (1984) Incentives for increasing return rates: Magnitude levels, response bias, and format. Public Opinion Quarterly, 48, 794-800.
6. Mullen, P. D., Easling, I., Nixon, S. A., Koester, D. R., & Biddle, A. K. (1987). The cost-effectiveness of randomized incentive and follow-up contacts in a national mail survey of family physicians. Evaluation and the Health Professions, 10(2), 232-245.
7. Ringel, S. P., Vickrey, B. G., & Rogstad, T. L. (1996). US neurologists: Attitudes on the US health care system. Neurology, 47, 279-287.
8. Shiono, P. H., & Klebanoff, M. A. (1991). The effect of two mailing strategies on the response to a survey of physicians. American Journal of Epidemiology, 134, 539-542.
9. Spry, V. M., Hovell, M. F., Sallis, J. G., Hofstetter, C. R., Elder, J. P., & Molgaard, C. A. (1989). Recruiting survey respondents to mailed surveys: Controlled trials of incentives and prompts. American Journal of Epidemiology, 130(1), 166-172.
10. Tambor, E. S., Chase, G. A.. Faden, R. R., Geller, G., Hofman, K. J., & Holtzman, N. A. (1993). Improving response rates through incentive and follow-up: The effect on a survey of physicians' knowledge of genetics. American Journal of Public Health, 83(11), 1599-1603.
11. Urban, N., Anderson, G., & Tseng, A. (1993). Effects on response rates and costs of stamps vs. business reply in a mail survey of physicians. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 46(5), 455-459.
12. Vickrey, B. G., Rogstad, T. L., & Albright, C. L. (1996). U.S. Neurologists 1993-1994. Minneapolis, MN: American Academy of Neurology.
13. Woolf, B. (1955). On estimating the relation between blood group and disease. Annals of Human Genetics, 19, 251-253.