Personally addressed hand-signed letters increase questionnaire response: A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BMC Health Services Research

Volumn 6, Issue , 2006, Pages

  Scott, Pippa ^a   Edwards, Phil ^a  

^a LONDON SCHOOL OF HYGIENE AND TROPICAL MEDICINE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; QUALITY CONTROL; QUESTIONNAIRE; SOCIAL CARE; WRITING; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMAN RELATION; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; META ANALYSIS; NOMENCLATURE; PROBABILITY; PROCEDURES; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC);

COMMUNICATION; CORRESPONDENCE AS TOPIC; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMANS; NAMES; PROBABILITY; QUESTIONNAIRES; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RESEARCH DESIGN; RESEARCHER-SUBJECT RELATIONS;

EID: 33748966452     PISSN: 14726963     EISSN: 14726963     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-6-111     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Armstrong BK, White E, Saracci R: Response rates and their maximisation. In Principles of exposure measurement in epidemiology. Monographs in Epidemiology and Biostatistics Volume 21. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1995:294-321.
2. Edwards P, Roberts I, Clarke M, DiGuiseppi C, Pratap S, Wentz R, Kwan I, Cooper R: Methods to increase response rates to postal questionnaires. The Cochrane Database of Methodology Reviews 2003.
3. McKenzie-McHarg K, Tully L, Gates S, Ayers S, Brocklehurst P: Effect on survey response rate of hand-written versus printed signature on a covering letter: randomised controlled trial. BMC Health Services Research 2005, 5:52.
4. DerSimonian R, Laird N: Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Controlled Clin Trials 1986, 7:177-88.
5. Higgins J, Thompson S, Deeks J, Altman D: Measuring inconsistencies in meta-analyses. British Medical Journal 2003, 327:557-560.
6. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C: Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 1997, 315:629-34.
7. Roberts RE, McCrory OF, Forthofer RN: Further evidence on using a deadline to stimulate responses to a mail survey. Public Opinion Quarterly 1978, 42:407-410.
8. Wright SJ: Mail survey response rates: A test of four techniques designed to increase response rates and a discussion of the associated cost considerations. In Student Research Report Massey University, Department of Marketing; 1984.
9. Childers TL, Skinner SJ: Theoretical and empirical issues in the identification of survey respondents. Journal of the Market Research Society 1985, 27(1):39-53.
10. Martin WS, Duncan WJ, Powers TL, Sawyer JC: Costs and benefits of selected response inducement techniques in mail survey research. Journal of Business Research 1989, 19:67-79.
11. White MB, Chambers KM: Type of cover letter and questionnaire color: do they influence the response rate in survey research with marriage and family therapists? Family Therapy 1997, 24(1):19-24.
12. Weilbacher WM, Walsh HR: Mail questionnaires and the personalized letter of transmittal. Marketing Notes 1952, 16:331-336.
13. Dillman DA, Frey JH: Contribution of personalization to mail questionnaire response as an element of a previously tested method. J Appl Psychol 1974, 59(3):297-301.
14. Matteson MT: Type of transmittal letter and questionnaire colour as two variables influencing response rates in a mail survey. J Appl Psychol 1974, 59(4):535-536.
15. Kerin RA, Harvey MG: Methodological considerations in corporate mail surveys: a research note. Journal of Business Research 1976, 4(3):277-281.
16. King JO: The influence of personalization on mail survey response rates. Arkansas Business Economic Rev 1978, 11:15-18.
17. Worthen BR, Valcarce RW: Relative effectiveness of personalized and form covering letters in initial and follow-up mail surveys. Psychology Reports 1985, 57:735-744.
18. Green KE, Kvidahl RF: Personalization and offers of results: effects on response rates. Journal of Experimental Education 1989, 57:263-270.
19. Gitelson RJ, Drogin EB: An experiment on the efficacy of a certified final mailing. Journal of Leisure Research 1992, 24(1):72-78.
20. Shin E: An experimental study of techniques to improve response rates of mail questionnaire. Utah State University; 1992.