Surveying general practitioners: Does a low response rate matter?

British Journal of General Practice

Volumn 47, Issue 415, 1997, Pages 91-94

  Templeton, Lorna ^a  

^a KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Alcohol misuse; Questionnaire; Response rates; Survey

Indexed keywords

ALCOHOL ABUSE; ARTICLE; GENERAL PRACTICE; GENERAL PRACTITIONER; HEALTH PROMOTION; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PHYSICIAN ATTITUDE; QUESTIONNAIRE; TELEPHONE;

ADULT; ALCOHOLISM; DATA COLLECTION; FAMILY PRACTICE; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 0031016668     PISSN: 09601643     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (5)

1. Boyd HW, Westfall R. Interviewer bias once more revisited. In: Social research: principles and procedures. Brynner J, Stribey KM (eds).Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1978.
2. Kidder LH, Judd CM. Modes of data collection. In: Research methods in social relations, 5th edn. Kidder LH, Judd CM (eds). Holt, Rinehart & Winston: Philadelphia, 1986.
3. Dillman DA. The design and administration of mail surveys. Annu Rev Social 1991; 17: 225-249.
4. de Vaus DA. Administering questionnaires. In: Surveys in social research (3rd edn). de Vaus DA. London: Allen & Unwin and UCL Press, 1991.
5. Guadagnoli E, Cunningham S. The effects of non-response and late response on a survey of physician attitudes. Eval Health Professions 1989; 12 (3): 318-328.