Inaccessible novel questionnaires in published medical research: Hidden methods, hidden costs

American Journal of Epidemiology

Volumn 164, Issue 12, 2006, Pages 1141-1144

  Schilling, Lisa M ^a   Kozak, Katarzyna ^b   Lundahl, Kristy ^a   Dellavalle, Robert P ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Data collection; Methods; Peer review; Questionnaires; Research design

Indexed keywords

CRITICAL ANALYSIS; METHODOLOGY; PUBLISHING; QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY; RESEARCH WORK;

ARTICLE; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; METHODOLOGY; PEER REVIEW; POLICY; PUBLICATION; QUESTIONNAIRE;

ACCESS TO INFORMATION; BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; HUMANS; PEER REVIEW, RESEARCH; PERIODICALS; QUESTIONNAIRES; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 33845617643     PISSN: 00029262     EISSN: 14766256     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwj349     Document Type: Article

References (8)

1. Hunt SD, Sparkman RD, Wilcox JB. The pretest in survey research. Issues and preliminary findings. J Market Res 1982;19:269-73.
2. Martinson BC, Anderson MS, De Vries R. Scientists behaving badly. Nature 2005;435:737-8.
3. Boynton PM, Greenhalgh T. Hands-on guide to questionnaire research. Selecting, designing, and developing your questionnaire. BMJ 2004;328:1312-15.
4. Olsen J. Epidemiology deserves better questionnaires. IEA European Questionnaire Group International Epidemiological Association. Int J Epidemiol 1998;27:935.
5. Wilcox AJ. The quest for better questionnaires. Am J Epidemiol 1999;150:1261-2.
6. Gallacher J. Epidemiology deserves better questionnaires. (Letter). Int J Epidemiol 1999;28:804.
7. Steinbrook R. Public access to NIH-funded research. N Engl J Med 2005;352:1739-41.
8. Butler D. Google makes data free for all. Nature 2005;438:400-1.