Rationale for the study methods and design of the epidemiology of lower urinary tract symptoms (EpiLUTS) study

BJU International

Volumn 104, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 348-351

  Coyne, Karin S ^a   Sexton, Chris C ^a   Kopp, Zoe S ^b   Luks, Samantha ^c   Gross, Ashley ^c   Irwin, Debra ^d   Milsom, Ian ^e  

^a UNITED BIOSOURCE CORPORATION   (United States)

^b PFIZER INC   (United States)

^c YouGovPolimetrix ^*  (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

^e SAHLGRENSKA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Data collection; Epidemiology; LUTS; Prevalence; Research methods; Urology

Indexed keywords

COMORBIDITY; HEALTH SURVEY; HELP SEEKING BEHAVIOR; HUMAN; INTERNET; LOWER URINARY TRACT SYMPTOM; PREVALENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; QUALITY OF LIFE; REVIEW; SEXUAL HEALTH; SWEDEN; UNITED KINGDOM; UNITED STATES;

ADULT; AGED; EPIDEMIOLOGIC METHODS; EUROPE; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERNET; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSTATISM; QUALITY OF LIFE; UNITED STATES; URINATION DISORDERS;

EID: 62849123976     PISSN: 14644096     EISSN: 1464410X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.08425.x     Document Type: Review

References (24)

1. Hollis N. Can a Picture Save 1,000 Words? Integrating Phone and Online Methodologies. New York : Advertising Research Foundation, 1999
2. Link M, Oldendick R. Call Screening. Is it really a problem for survey research. Public Opin Q 1999 63 : 577 89
3. Steeh C, Kirgis N, Cannon B, Dewitt J. Are they really as bad as they seem? Nonresonse rates at the end of the twentieth century. J Official Statistics 2001 17 : 227 47
4. Tourangeau R. Survey research and societal change. Annu Rev Psychol 2004 55 : 775 801
5. Rivers D. Sample Matching: Representative Sampling from Internet Panels. Palo Alto, CA : Polimetrix, 2006
6. de Leeuw E. Data quality in mail, telephone, and face to face surveys, PhD Dissertation. University of Amsterdam, Netherlands, 1992
7. Schonlau M, Fricker RD, Elliott MN. Conducting Research Surveys via E-mail and the Web. Santa Monica, CA : RAND Distribution Services, 2002
8. Couper M. Web surveys: a review of issues and approaches. Public Opin Q 2000 64 : 464 94
9. Cronk BC, West JL. Personality research on the Internet: a comparison of Web-based and traditional instruments in take-home and in-class settings. Behav Res Meth Instrum Comput 2002 34 : 177 80
10. Fricker R, Galesic M, Tourangeau R, Yan T. An experimental comparison of Web and telephone surveys. Public Opin Q 2005 69 : 370 92
11. Fricker R, Schonlau M. Advantages and disadvantages of Internet research surveys: evidence from the literature. Field Meth 2002 14 : 347 67
12. Joinson A. Social desirability, anonymity, and Internet-based questionnaires. Behav Res Meth Instrum Comput 1999 31 : 433 8
13. McCabe SE, Boyd CJ, Couper MP, Crawford S, D'Arcy H. Mode effects for collecting alcohol and other drug use data: web and U.S. mail. J Stud Alcohol 2002 63 : 755 61
14. Quigley B, Riemer R, Cruzen D, Rosen S. Internet versus paper survey administration: preliminary finding on respons rates. 42nd Annual Conference of the International Military Testing Association, Edinburgh, Scotland, 2000.
15. Taylor H. Does Internet research work? Comparing electronic survey results with telephone survey. Int J Market Res 2000 42 : 51 63
16. Knapp Whittier D, Seeley S, St Lawrence JS. A comparison of Web- with paper-based surveys of gay and bisexual men who vacationed in a gay resort community. AIDS Educ Prev 2004 16 : 476 85
17. Parks KA, Pardi AM, Bradizza CM. Collecting data on alcohol use and alcohol-related victimization: a comparison of telephone and Web-based survey methods. J Stud Alcohol 2006 67 : 318 23
18. Thornton B, Gupta S. Comparative validation of a partial (versus full) randomized response technique: attempting to control for social desirability bias to sensitive questions. Indiv Diff Res 2004 2 : 214 24
19. Internet World Stats. Internet Usage and Population Statistics for North America. Available at: http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats14.htm. Accessed October 2008.
20. Internet World Stats. Internet Usage in the European Union. Available at: http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats9.htm. Accessed October 2008.
21. Bertaccini A, Vassallo F, Martino F et al. Symptoms, bothersomeness and quality of life in patients with LUTS suggestive of BPH. Eur Urol 2001 40 : 13 8
22. Abrams P, Cardozo L, Fall M et al. The standardisation of terminology in lower urinary tract function: report from the standardisation sub-committee of the International Continence Society. Urology 2003 61 : 37 49
23. Irwin DE, Milsom I, Hunskaar S et al. Population-based survey of urinary incontinence, overactive bladder, and other lower urinary tract symptoms in five countries: results of the EPIC study. Eur Urol 2006 50 : 1306 15
24. Herschorn S, Gajewski J, Schulz J, Corcos J. A population-based study of urinary symptoms and incontinence: the Canadian Urinary Bladder Survey. BJU Int 2008 101 : 52 8