Editorial: Mode of administration bias

Journal of Manual and Manipulative Therapy

Volumn 18, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 61-63

  Cook, Chad ^a  

^a DUKE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EDITORIAL; HEALTH; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INTERVIEW; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT INFORMATION; PUBLISHING; QUESTIONNAIRE; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SELF REPORT;

EID: 77953933795     PISSN: 10669817     EISSN: 20426186     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1179/106698110X12640740712617     Document Type: Editorial

References (21)

1. Johnson RJ. Outcomes research in AOSSM (Presidential Address of the American Orthopedic Society for Sports Medicine). Am J Sports Med. 1994;22:734-738
2. Mohtadi NGH. Quality of life assessment as an outcome in anterior cruciate ligament reconstructive surgery. In: Jackson DW, (ed.) The anterior cruciate ligament: current and future concept. New York: Raven Press Ltd; 1993.
3. McColl E, Jacoby A, Thomas L, Soutter J, Bamford C, Steen N, et al. Design and use of questionnaires: a review of best practice applicable to surveys of health service staff and patients. Health Technol Assess. 2001;5:1-256.
4. Sackett DL, Haynes RB, Guyatt GH, Tugwell P. Clinical epidemiology. 2nd ed. Boston: Little, Brown, and Co; 1991.
5. Bowling A, Bond M, Jenkinson C, Lamping D. Short form-36 (SF-36) health survey questionnaire: which normative data should be used? Comparisons between the norms provided by the Omnibus Survey in Britain, the health survey for England and the Oxford health and lifestyle survey. J Pub Health Med. 1999;21:255-270
6. Schuman H, Presser S. Questions and answers in attitude surveys. New York: Academic Press; 1981.
7. Bajekal M, Harries T, Bremen R, Woodfield K. Review of disability estimates and definitions. A study carried out on behalf of the Department for Work and Pensions, in-house report no. 128. London: Department of Work and Pensions; 2004.
8. Delgado-Rodriquez M, Llorca J. Bias. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2004;58:635-641
9. Bowling A. Mode of questionnaire administration can have serious effects on data quality. J Public Health. 2005;27:281-291
10. Weinberger M, Oddone EZ, Samsa GP, Landsman PB. Are health-related quality of life measures affected by mode of administration? J Clin Epidemiol. 1996;49:135-140
11. Fowler FJ. Data collection methods. In: Spilker B, (ed.) Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics clinical trials. Philadelphia: Lippincott; 1996.
12. Grootendorst V, Feeney D, Furlong W. Does it matter whom and how you ask? Inter- and intra-rater agreement in the Ontario Health Survey. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997;50:127-135
13. Khoury MJ, Flanders WD. Bias in using family history as a risk factor in case-control studies of disease. Epidemiology 1995;6:511-519
14. Ramsay J, Campbell J, Schroter S, Green J, Roland M. The general practice assessment survey (GPAS): tests of data quality and measurement properties. Fam Pract. 2000;17:372-379
15. Tripepi G, Jager KJ, Dekker FW,Wanner C, Zoccali C. Bias in clinical research. Kidney Int. 2008;73:148-153
16. Crossley TF, Kennedy S. The Reliability of Self Assessed Health Status. J Health Economics. 2002;21:643-658
17. Ioannidis JP, Trikalinos TA. Early extreme contradictory estimates may appear in published research: the Proteus phenomenon in molecular genetics research and randomized trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005;58:543-549
18. Hartman J, Forsen J, Wallace M, Neely G. Tutorials in clinical research: Part IV: recognizing and controlling bias. Laryngoscope. 2009;112:23-31.
19. Hoher J, Bach T, Munster A, Bouillon B, Tiling T. Does the mode of data collection change results in a subjective knee score? Am J Sports Med. 1997;25:642-647
20. Abramson JJ, Abramson ZH. Survey methods in community medicine: epidemiological research, programme evaluation, Clincal Trials. 5th ed. London: Churchill Livingstone; 1999.
21. Tourangeau R, Smith TW. Asking sensitive questions: the impact of data collection mode, question format and question context. Public Opinion Quart. 1996;60:275-304.