Does it matter whether the recipient of patient questionnaires in general practice is the general practitioner or an independent researcher? The REPLY randomised trial

BMC Medical Research Methodology

Volumn 8, Issue , 2008, Pages

  Desborough, James A ^a   Butters, Peter ^b   Bhattacharya, Debi ^a   Holland, Richard C ^c   Wright, David J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EAST ANGLIA   (United Kingdom)

^b Bungay Medical Practice   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF EAST ANGLIA   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONSULTATION; FEMALE; GENERAL PRACTITIONER; HUMAN; LONG TERM CARE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL PRACTICE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PRESCRIPTION; PRIMARY MEDICAL CARE; QUESTIONNAIRE; SELF REPORT; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; HEALTH BEHAVIOR; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; POSTAL MAIL; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; STATISTICS; UNITED KINGDOM;

ADULT; BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; ENGLAND; FEMALE; HEALTH BEHAVIOR; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PHYSICIAN-PATIENT RELATIONS; PHYSICIANS, FAMILY; POSTAL SERVICE; QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 46749135224     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14712288     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-8-42     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. The increasing importance of patient surveys. PD Cleary, Br Med J 1999 319 7212 720 721
2. Patients' own assessments of quality of primary care compared with objective records based measures of technical quality of care: cross sectional study. M Rao A Clarke C Sanderson R Hammersley, Br Med J 2006 333 7557 19 10.1136/bmj.38874.499167.7C
3. Questioning practices in health care research: the contribution of social surveys to the creation of knowledge. AGH Thompson, Int J Qual Health Care 2003 15 3 187 188 10.1093/intqhc/mzg040 12803345
4. Can patients assess the quality of health care? A Coulter, Br Med J 2006 333 7557 1 2 10.1136/bmj.333.7557.1
5. Increasing response rates to postal questionnaires: systematic review. P Edwards I Roberts M Clarke C DiGuiseppi S Pratap R Wentz I Kwan, Br Med J 2002 324 7347 1183 10.1136/bmj.324.7347.1183
6. Interviews or postal questionnaires? Comparisons of data about women's experiences with maternity services. A Cartwright, Milbank Q 1988 66 172 189 10.2307/3349989 3173261
7. The Effect of Data Collection Mode on Smoking Attitudes and Behavior in Young African American and Latina Women: Face-to-Face Interview Versus Self-Administered Questionnaires. CP Kaplan JF Hilton S Park-Tanjasiri Pfeacute EJ rez-Stable, Eval Rev 2001 25 4 454 473 11480308
8. Design and use of questionnaires: a review of best practice applicable to surveys of health service staff and patients. E McColl A Jacoby L Thomas J Soutter C Bamford N Steen R Thomas E Harvey A Garratt J Bond, Health Technol assess 2001 5 31 1 256 11809125
9. Bias in patient assessments of general practice: General Practice Assessment Survey scores in surgery and postal responders. P Bower MO Roland, Br J Gen Prac 2003 53 126 128
10. Mode of questionnaire administration can have serious effects on data quality. A Bowling, J Public Health 2005 27 3 281 291 10.1093/pubmed/fdi031
11. Assessing research outcomes by postal questionnaire with telephone follow-up. C Parker M Dewey, Int J Epidemiol 2000 29 1065 1069 10.1093/ije/29.6.1065 11101549
12. Lay views of drugs and medicines: orthodox and unorthodox accounts. N Britten, Modern Medicine: Lay perspectives and experiences London, UCL Press, Williams SJ, Calnan M, 1996 48 73
13. The expression of aversion to medicines in general practice consultations. N Britten F Stevenson J Gafaranga C Barry C Bradley, Soc Sci Med 2004 59 7 1495 1503 10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.01.019 15246177
14. Confidentiality assurances in surveys: Reassurance or threat? E Singer HJ Hippler N Schwarz, Int J Public Opin Res 1992 4 3 256 268 10.1093/ijpor/4.3.256
15. Continuity of care in general practice: a survey of patients views. H Schers S Webster H Hoogen A Avery R Grol W Bosch, Br J Gen Prac 2002 52 459 462
16. Feedback of patients' evaluations of general practice care: a randomised trial. E Vingerhoets M Wensing R Grol, Qual Saf Health Care 2001 10 4 224 228 10.1136/qhc.0100224.
17. Medicines Partnership: from compliance to concordance. Project evaluation toolkit. K Cox G Mynors, Medicines Partnership 2003
18. The Medication Adherence Report Scale (MARS). R Horne M Hankins, Centre for Health Care Research Brighton, University of Brighton 1997
19. The Satisfaction with Information about Medicines Scale (SIMS): a new measurement tool for audit and research. R Horne M Hankins R Jenkins, Qual Saf Health Care 2001 10 3 135 140 10.1136/qhc.0100135. 11533420
20. Health promotion in primary care: Physician-patient communication and decision making about prescription medications. G Makoul P Arntson T Schofield, Soc Sci Med 1995 41 9 1241 1254 10.1016/0277-9536(95)00061-B 8545677
21. The 'Medical Interview Satisfaction Scale' (MISS-21) adapted for British general practice. R Meakin J Weinman, Fam Pract 2002 19 3 257 263 10.1093/fampra/19.3.257 11978716
22. Pharmacy domiciliary visiting: Derivation of a viable service model. D Bhattacharya, PhD thesis University of Bradford, School of pharmacy Bradford, University of Bradford 2003
23. Helping patients follow prescribed treatment: clinical applications. MDHP Haynes R Brian Garg Amit X, JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association American Medical Association 2002 288 22 2880 2883 10.1001/jama.288.22.2880
24. Non-compliance - or how many aunts has Matilda? EC Wright, Lancet 1993 342 8876 909 913 10.1016/0140-6736(93)91951-H 8105172
25. Self-regulation and self-management in asthma: Exploring the role of illness perceptions and treatment beliefs in explaining non-adherence of preventer medication. R Horne J Weinman, Psychol Health Brunner / Routledge 2002 17 1 17 10.1080/08870440290001502
26. A pilot study assessing the effectiveness of a decision aid on patient adherence with oral biphosphonate medication. S Oakley T Walley, Pharmaceutical Journal 2006 276 536 538
27. Measuring Adherence to Behavioural and Medical Interventions. MZ Vitolins CS Rand SR Rapp PM Ribisl MA Sevick, Control Clin trials 2000 21 5, Supplement 1 S188 S194 10.1016/S0197-2456(00)00077-5 11018574
28. Impact of reminders and method of questionnaire distribution on patient response to mail-back satisfaction survey. I Gasquet B Falissard P Ravaud, J Clin Epidemiol 2001 54 11 1174 1180 10.1016/S0895-4356(01)00387-0 11675170
29. Prospective comparison of endoscopy patient satisfaction surveys: e-mail versus standard mail versus telephone. GC Harewood RF Yacavone GR Locke MJ Wiersema, Am J Gastroenterol 2001 96 12 3312 3317 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2001. 05331.x 11774942
30. Comparision of response rates to a postal questionnaire from a general practice and a research unit. W Smith I Crombie P Campion J Knox, Br Med J 1985 291 1483 1485
31. 25-year Trends and Socio-demographic Differences in Response Rates: Finnish Adult Health Behaviour Survey. H Tolonen S Helakorpi K Talala V Helasoja T Martelin R Prättälä Eur J Epidemiol 2006 21 6 409 415 10.1007/s10654-006-9019-8 16804763
32. Response rates to mail surveys published in medical journals. DA Asch MK Jedrziewski NA Christakis, J Clin Epidemiol 1997 50 10 1129 1136 10.1016/S0895-4356(97)00126-1 9368521
33. Can different patient satisfaction survey methods yield consistent results? Comparison of three surveys. G Cohen J Forbes M Garraway, Br Med J 1996 313 7061 841 844 8870568
34. Asking Questions About Behavior: Cognition, Communication, and Questionnaire Construction. N Schwarz D Oyserman, Am J Eval 2001 22 2 127 160