A comparison of a postal survey and mixed-mode survey using a questionnaire on patients' experiences with breast care

Journal of Medical Internet Research

Volumn 13, Issue 3, 2011, Pages

  Zuidgeest, Marloes ^a,b   Hendriks, Michelle ^b   Koopman, Laura ^b   Spreeuwenberg, Peter ^b   Rademakers, Jany ^b  

^a TILBURG UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b NETHERLANDS INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Breast cancer; Consumer satisfaction; Data collection; Health care quality; Health care quality indicator; Patient preferences

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST TUMOR; COMPARATIVE STUDY; E-MAIL; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH CARE SURVEY; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PATIENT SATISFACTION; POSTAL MAIL; QUESTIONNAIRE; STATISTICS; WOMEN'S HEALTH;

ADULT; AGED; BREAST NEOPLASMS; ELECTRONIC MAIL; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HEALTH CARE SURVEYS; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PATIENT SATISFACTION; POSTAL SERVICE; QUESTIONNAIRES; WOMEN'S HEALTH;

EID: 80053533282     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14388871     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2196/jmir.1241     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Schut FT, Van de Ven WP. Rationing and competition in the Dutch health-care system. Health Econ 2005 Sep;14(Suppl 1):S59-S74. [doi: 10.1002/hec.1036] [Medline: 16161190] (Pubitemid 41404318)
2. Delnoij DM, ten Asbroek G, Arah OA, de Koning JS, Stam P, Poll A, et al. Made in the USA: the import of American Consumer Assessment of Health Plan Surveys (CAHPS) into the Dutch social insurance system. Eur J Public Health 2006 Dec;16(6):652-659 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.1093/eurpub/ckl023] [Medline: 16524940] (Pubitemid 44899970)
3. Zuidgeest M, Sixma H, Rademakers J. Measuring patients' experiences with rheumatic care: the consumer quality index rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatol Int 2009 Apr 16;30(2):159-167. [doi: 10.1007/s00296-009-0926-3] [Medline: 19370351]
4. Damman OC, Hendriks M, Sixma HJ. Towards more patient centred healthcare: a new Consumer Quality Index instrument to assess patients' experiences with breast care. Eur J Cancer 2009 Jun;45(9):1569-1577. [doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2008. 12.011] [Medline: 19167212]
5. Brandt H, Zuidgeest M, Sixma H. Development of CQ-index Care for the Handicapped: measuring the quality of care from a client perspective (in Dutch). Utrecht: NIVEL; 2007. URL: http://www.nivel.nl/pdf/Pilot-ontwikkeling-CQ-index- Gehandicaptenzorg-2007.pdf [accessed 2010-12-06] [WebCite Cache ID 5ulsU7mfM]
6. Wiegers TA, Stubbe JH, Triemstra M. Development of the CQ-Index Nursing Homes and Homecare: Quality of Life for Residents, Representatives and Clients. Utrecht: NIVEL; 2007.
7. Couper MP. Web survey design and administration. Public Opin Q 2001;65(2):230-253. [Medline: 11420757]
8. Kaplowitz MD, Hadlock TD, Levine R. A comparison of web and mail survey response rates. Public Opin Q 2004;68(1):94-101. (Pubitemid 38750629)
9. Sills SJ, Song CY. Innovations in survey research: an application of web-based surveys. Soc Sci Comput Rev 2002;20(1):22-30. (Pubitemid 36657153)
10. Kiesler S, Sproull LS. Response effects in the electronic survey. Public Opin Q 1986;50(3):402-413.
11. Kwak N, Radler R. A comparison between mail and web surveys: response pattern, respondent profile, and data quality. J Off Stat 2002;18(2):257-73.
12. Schaefer DR, Dillman DA. Development of a standard e-mail methodology. Public Opin Q 1998;62(3):378-397.
13. Schmidt CB. Casting the Net: surveying an Internet population. J Comput Mediat Commun 1997;3(1).
14. Tse A. Comparing the response rate, response speed, and response quality of two methods of sending questionnaires: e-mail vs. mail. J Market Res Soc 1998;40(4):354-361.
15. Leece P, Bhandari M, Sprague S, Swiontkowski MF, Schemitsch EH, Tornetta P, et al. Internet versus mailed questionnaires: a controlled comparison (2). J Med Internet Res 2004 Oct 29;6(4):e39 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.2196/jmir.6.4.e39] [Medline: 15631963]
16. Zuidgeest M, Hendriks M, Spreeuwenberg J, Rademakers J. Usefulness of the CQ index: Report Volume 1: Methods of Data Collection for CQI Research (in Dutch). Utrecht: NIVEL; 2008.
17. Boer de D, Hendriks M, Damman OC, Spreeuwenberg P, Rademakers J, Delnoij D, et al. Experiences of Insured With Care and Health insurer: CQ-Index Health and Health Insurance, Measurement 2007 (in Dutch). Utrecht: NIVEL; 2007.
18. Slijkhuis R. Is Dillman Absolute? Research Into the Influence of Layout and Contact Process of CQI Surveys on the Quantitative Response, Qualitative Response and Cost of Data Collection (in Dutch) [Bachelors thesis]. Twente, Sweden: University Twente; 2008.
19. Edwards P, Roberts I, Clarke M, DiGuiseppi C, Pratap S, Wentz R, et al. Methods to increase response rates to postal questionnaires. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007(2):MR000008. [doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000008.pub3] [Medline: 17443629]
20. Hoksbergen M. Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek. 2008 Dec 17. 1.2 Million Dutch People Have no Internet Access at Home URL: http://www.cbs.nl/nl- NL/menu/themas/vrije-tijd-cultuur/publicaties/artikelen/archief/2008/ 2008-2641-wm. htm [accessed 2011-05-11] [WebCite Cache ID 5ybU734dq]
21. Madden M. Internet Penetration and Impact. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project; 2009 Mar 24. URL: http://www.pewinternet.org/~/ media//Files/Reports/2006/PIP-Internet-Impact.pdf.pdf [accessed 2009-03-03] [WebCite Cache ID 5fViAM9uE]
22. van Campen C, Sixma H, Kerssens JJ, Peters L. Comparisons of the costs and quality of patient data collection by mail versus telephone versus in-person interviews. Eur J Public Health 1998:66-70. (Pubitemid 28158762)
23. de Vries H, Elliott MN, Hepner KA, Keller SD, Hays RD. Equivalence of mail and telephone responses to the CAHPS Hospital Survey. Health Serv Res 2005 Dec;40(6 Pt 2):2120-2139. [doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2005.00479.x] [Medline: 16316441] (Pubitemid 41814229)
24. Christian LM, Dillman DA, Smyth JD. The Effects of Mode and Format on Answers to Scalar Questions in Telephone and Web Surveys. In: Lepkowski JM, Tucker C, Leeuw E, Japec L, Lavrakas P, Link M, et al, editors. Advances in Telephone Survey Methodology. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Interscience; 2007:250-275.
25. Carini RM, Hayek JC, Kuh GD, Kennedy JM, Ouimet JA. College student responses to web and paper surveys: does mode matter? Res Higher Educ 2003;44(1):1-19 [FREE Full text] [WebCite Cache] (Pubitemid 38103910)
26. Basnov M, Kongsved SM, Bech P, Hjollund NH. Reliability of short form-36 in an Internet-and a pen-and-paper version. Inform Health Soc Care 2009 Jan;34(1):53-58. [doi: 10.1080/17538150902779527] [Medline: 19306199]
27. Koopman L, Rademakers J. CQ-index Breast Care: Research Into the Discriminative Power: Quality of Care as Perceived by People With a Breast Abnormality From the Patients' Perspective (in Dutch). Utrecht: NIVEL; 2008. URL: http://www.nivel.nl/pdf/Rapport-CQI-Mammacare.pdf [accessed 2010-12-06] [WebCite Cache ID 5ultiv6lD]
28. Dillman DA, Smuth JD, Cristian LM. Internet, Mail and Mixed-Mode Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley; 2009.
29. Dickerson MD, Gentry JW. Characteristics of adopters and non-adopters of home computers. J Consumer Re 1983 Sep;10(2):225-235.
30. Slijkhuis R. The Internet: Valid or Flawed: The Internet: Valid or Flawed: Study Into the Validity of the Internet as a Mode of Data Collection in a Survey Among the General Dutch Public [Masters thesis]. Twente, Sweden: University Twente; 2008.
31. Ritter P, Lorig K, Laurent D, Matthews K. Internet versus mailed questionnaires: a randomized comparison. J Med Internet Res 2004 Sep 15;6(3):e29 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.2196/jmir.6.3.e29] [Medline: 15471755]
32. Larsson J, Sandelin K, Forsberg C. Health-related quality of life and healthcare experiences in breast cancer patients in a study of Swedish women. Cancer Nurs 2010;33(2):164-170. [doi: 10.1097/NCC.0b013e3181bb0d05] [Medline: 20142743]
33. Kongsved SM, Basnov M, Holm-Christensen K, Hjollund NH. Response rate and completeness of questionnaires: a randomized study of Internet versus paper-and-pencil versions. J Med Internet Res 2007;9(3):e25 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.2196/jmir.9.3.e25] [Medline: 17942387]