Print format and sender recognition were related to survey completion rate

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 59, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 635-641

  Brehaut, Jamie C ^a,b   Graham, Ian D ^a,b   Visentin, Laura ^a   Stiell, Ian G ^a,b  

^a OTTAWA HOSPITAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Data collection; Emergency physicians; Response bias; Response rate; Survey completion; Survey methods

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; EMERGENCY PHYSICIAN; FACTORIAL DESIGN; FEMALE; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; MALE; PREDICTION; PRINTING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK;

EID: 33646700764     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.04.012     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Kaner E.F.S., Haighton C.A., and McAvoy B.R. 'So much post, so busy with practice-so, no time!': a telephone survey of general practitioners' reasons for not participating in postal questionnaire surveys. Br J Gen Pract 48 (1998) 1067-1069
2. McAvoy B.R., and Kaner E.F.S. General practice postal surveys: a questionnaire too far?. Br Med J 313 (1996) 732-733
3. Cartwright A. Professionals as responders: variations in and effects of response rates to questionnaires, 1961-77. Br Med J 2 (1978) 1419-1421
4. Griffith L.E., Cook D.J., Guyatt G.H., and Charles C.A. Comparison of open and closed questionnaire formats in obtaining demographic information from Canadian general internists. J Clin Epidemiol 52 (1999) 997-1005
5. Field T.S., Cadoret C.A., Brown M.L., Ford M., Greene S.M., Hill D., Hornbrook M.C., Meenan R.T., White M.J., and Zapka J.M. Surveying physicians: do components of the "Total Design Approach" to optimizing survey response rates apply to physicians?. Med Care 40 (2002) 596-605
6. Streiff M., Dundes L., and Spivak J. A mail survey of United States hematologists and oncologists: a comparison of business reply versus stamped return envelopes. J Clin Epidemiol 54 (2001) 430-432
7. Gunn W.J., and Rhodes I.N. Physician response rates to a telephone survey: effects of monetary incentive level. Public Opin Q 45 (1981) 109-115
8. Mizes J.S., Fleece E.L., and Roos C. Incentives for increasing return rates: magnitude levels, response bias, and format. Public Opin Q 48 (1984) 794-800
9. Berk M.L., Edwards W.S., and Gay N.L. The use of a prepaid incentive to convert nonresponders on a survey of physicians. Eval Health Prof 16 (1993) 239-245
10. Deehan A., Templeton L., Taylor C., Drummond C., and Strang J. The effect of cash and other financial inducements on the response rate of general practitioners in a national postal study. Br J Gen Pract 47 (1997) 87-90
11. Everett S.A., Price J.H., Bedell A.W., and Telljohann S.K. The effect of a monetary incentive on increasing the return rate of a survey to family physicians. Eval Health Prof 20 (1997) 207-214
12. Donaldson G.W., Moinpour C.M., Bush N.E., Chapko M., Jocom J., Siadak M., Nielsen-Stoeck M., Bradshaw J.M., Bichindaritz I., and Sullivan K.M. Physician participation in research surveys: a randomized study of inducements to return mailed research questionnaires. Eval Health Prof 22 (1999) 427-441
13. Kasprzyk D., Montano D.E., St Lawrence J.S., and Phillips W.R. The effects of variations in mode of delivery and monetary incentive on physicians' responses to a mailed survey assessing STD practice patterns. Eval Health Prof 24 (2001) 3-17
14. Rimm E.B., Stampfer M.J., Colditz G.A., Giovannucci E., and Willett W.C. Effectiveness of various mailing strategies among nonrespondents in a prospective cohort study. Am J Epidemiol 131 (1990) 1068-1071
15. Asch D.A., and Christakis N.A. Different response rates in a trial of two envelope styles in mail survey research. Epidemiology 5 (1994) 364-365
16. Del Valle M.L., Morgenstern H., Rogstad T.L., Albright C., and Vickrey B.G. A randomized trial of the impact of certified mail on response rate to a physician survey, and a cost-effectiveness analysis. Eval Health Prof 20 (1997) 389-406
17. Shosteck H., and Fairweather W.R. Physician response rates to mail and personal interview surveys. Public Opin Q 43 (1979) 206-217
18. Ogborne A.C., Rush B., and Fondacaro R. Dealing with nonrespondents in a mail survey of professionals: the cost-effectiveness of two alternatives. Eval Health Prof 9 (1986) 121-128
19. Parsons J.A., Warnecke R.B., Czaja R.F., Barnsley J., and Kaluzny A. Factors associated with response rates in a national survey of primary care physicians. Eval Rev 18 (1994) 756-765
20. Sibbald B., Addington-Hall J., Brenneman D., and Freeling P. Telephone versus postal surveys of general practitioners: methodological considerations. Br J Gen Pract 44 (1994) 297-300
21. Asch D.A., Christakis N.A., and Ubel P.A. Conducting physician mail surveys on a limited budget: a randomized trial comparing $2 bill versus $5 bill incentives. Med Care 36 (1998) 95-99
22. Dillman D. Mail and Internet surveys: the tailored design method (2000), Wiley, New York
23. Edwards P., Roberts I., Clarke M., DiGuiseppi C., Pratap S., Wentz R., and Kwan I. Increasing response rates to postal questionnaires: systematic review. Br Med J 324 (2002) 1183-1191
24. Dunn K.M., Jordan K., and Croft P.R. Does questionnaire structure influence response in postal surveys?. J Clin Epidemiol 56 (2003) 10-16
25. Kalantar J.S., and Talley N.J. The effects of lottery incentive and length of questionnaire on health survey response rates: a randomized study. J Clin Epidemiol 52 (1999) 1117-1122
26. Sauerland S., and Neugebauer E. An experiment of mailing physician surveys on two different issues in joint or separate mail. J Clin Epidemiol 55 (2002) 1046-1048
27. Heberlein T.A., and Baumgartner R. Factors affecting response rates to mailed questionnaires: a quantitative analysis of the published literature. Am Sociol Review 43 (1978) 447-462
28. Heywood A., Mudge P., Ring I., and Sanson-Fisher R. Reducing systematic bias in studies of general practitioners: the use of a medical peer in the recruitment of general practitioners in research. Fam Pract 12 (1995) 227-231
29. Ward J., Bruce T., and Holt P. Labour-saving strategies to maintain survey response rates: a randomized trial. Aust N Z J Public Health 22 3 Suppl (1998) 394-396
30. Man-Son-Hing M., Molnar F., St John P., Brymer C., and Rockwood K. Increasing physicians' response rates to mailed surveys: effect of investigator's name recognition. Ann R Coll Physicians Surg Can 33 (2000) 7-9
31. Bhandari M., Devereaux P.J., Swiontkowski M.F., Schemitsch E.H., Shankardass K., Sprague S., and Guyatt G.H. A randomized trial of opinion leader endorsement in a survey of orthopaedic surgeons: effect on primary response rates. Int J Epidemiol 32 (2003) 634-636
32. Stiell I.G., Greenberg G.H., McKnight R.D., Nair R.C., McDowell I., Reardon M., Stewart J.P., and Maloney J. Decision rules for the use of radiography in acute ankle injuries. JAMA 269 (1993) 1127-1132
33. Stiell I.G., McKnight R.D., Greenberg G.H., McDowell I., Nair R.C., Wells G.A., Johns C., and Worthington J.R. Implementation of the Ottawa Ankle Rules. JAMA 271 (1994) 827-832
34. Stiell I.G., Wells G.A., Vandemheen K.L., Clement C.M., Lesiuk H., De Maio V.J., Laupacis A., Schull M., McKnight R.D., Verbeek R., Brison R., Cass D., Dreyer J., Eisenhauer M.A., Greenberg G.H., MacPhail I., Morrison L., Reardon M., and Worthington J. The Canadian C-spine rule for radiography in alert and stable trauma patients. JAMA 286 (2001) 1841-1848
35. Stiell I.G., Clement C.M., McKnight R.D., Brison R., Schull M.J., Rowe B.H., Worthington J.R., Eisenhauer M.A., Cass D., Greenberg G., MacPhail I., Dreyer J., Lee J.S., Bandiera G., Reardon M., Holroyd B., Lesiuk H., and Wells G.A. The Canadian C-spine rule versus the NEXUS low-risk criteria in patients with trauma. N Engl J Med 349 (2003) 2510-2518
36. Graham I.D., Stiell I.G., Laupacis A., O'Connor A.M., and Wells G.A. Emergency physicians' attitudes toward and use of clinical decision rules for radiography. Acad Emerg Med 5 (1998) 134-140
37. Graham I.D., Stiell I.G., Laupacis A., McAuley L., Howell M., Clancy M., Durieux P., Simon N., Emparanza J.I., Aginaga J.R., O'connor A., and Wells G. Awareness and use of the Ottawa Ankle and Knee Rules in 5 countries: can publication alone be enough to change practice?. Ann Emerg Med 37 (2001) 259-266
38. Man-Son-Hing M., O'Connor A.M., Drake E., Biggs J., Hum V., and Laupacis A. The effect of qualitative vs. quantitative presentation of probability estimates on patient decision-making: a randomized trial. Health Expect 5 (2002) 246-255
39. Halpern S.D., Karlawish J.H., Casarett D., Berlin J.A., Townsend R.R., and Asch D.A. Hypertensive patients' willingness to participate in placebo-controlled trials: implications for recruitment efficiency. Am Heart J (2003) 985-992
40. Olivarius Nde F., and Andreasen A.H. Day-of-the-week effect on doctors' response to a postal questionnaire. Scand J Prim Health Care 13 (1995) 65-67
41. Raina P.S., Brehaut J.C., Platt R.W., Klassen T.P., Moher D., St John P., Bryant D., Viola R., and Pham B. The influence of display and statistical factors on the interpretation of metaanalysis results by physicians. Med Care (2005)
42. Asch D.A., Jedrziewski M.K., and Christakis N.A. Response rates to mail surveys published in medical journals. J Clin Epidemiol 10 (1997) 1129-1136
43. Morris C.J., Cantrill J.A., and Weiss M.C. GP survey response rate: a miscellany of influencing factors. Fam Pract 18 (2001) 454-456
44. Schwarz N. Self-reports: how the questions shape the answers. Am Psychol 54 (1999) 93-105
45. Elliott A., and Hannaford P. Third mailings in epidemiological studies: are they really necessary?. Fam Pract 20 (2003) 592-594