Obtaining valid response rates: Considerations beyond the tailored design method

Evaluation and Program Planning

Volumn 26, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 91-97

  Huang, Judy Y ^a   Hubbard, Susan M ^a   Mulvey, Kevin P ^b  

^a Johnson Bassin and Shaw Inc   (United States)

^b SAMHSA   (United States)

Author keywords

Mailed surveys; Participant recruitment; Primary care providers; Problems in survey research; Substance abuse; Substance abuse treatment; Substance abuse treatment providers; Survey participation; Survey response rate; Tailored design method; Treatment improvement protocols; Use of incentives

Indexed keywords

DESIGN; DRUG USER; PROJECT ASSESSMENT;

EID: 0037319882     PISSN: 01497189     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0149-7189(02)00091-5     Document Type: Article

References (8)

1. Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (CSAT) (2000) (Vol. 1). Retrospective Study Wave I quantitative results final report, Rockville, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services.
2. Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (CSAT) (2001a). Retrospective Study Wave II quantitative results final report. Rockville, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services.
3. Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (CSAT) (2001b). The TIP #24 Study final report. Rockville, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services.
4. Dillman, D. A. (1978). Mail and telephone surveys: The total design method. New York: Wiley-Interscience.
5. Dillman, D. A. (2000). Mail and Internet surveys: The tailored design method (2nd ed). New York: Wiley.
6. Hubbard, S. M., & Hayashi, S. W. (2003). Use of diffusion of innovations theory to drive a Federal agency's program evaluation. Evaluation and Program Planning, 26(1), 49-56.
7. Hubbard, S. M., & Mulvey, K. P. (2003). TIPs Evaluation Project Retrospective Study: Wave 1 and 2. Evaluation and Program Planning, 26(1), 57-67.
8. Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed). New York: Free Press.