An advance letter did not increase the response rates in a telephone survey: A randomized trial

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 66, Issue 12, 2013, Pages 1417-1421

  Carey, Renee N ^a   Reid, Alison ^a   Driscoll, Timothy R ^b   Glass, Deborah C ^c   Benke, Geza ^c   Fritschi, Lin ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^c The Alfred Centre   (Australia)

Author keywords

Advance notification; Cooperation rate; Randomized trial; Research methods; Response rate; Telephone survey

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ADVANCE LETTER; AGED; ARTICLE; AUSTRALIA; CONTROLLED STUDY; COOPERATION; HOUSEHOLD; HUMAN; INTENTION TO TREAT ANALYSIS; POSTAL MAIL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; TELEPHONE INTERVIEW;

EID: 84886946663     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: 18785921     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.03.007     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. S.I. Woodruff, J.A. Mayer, and E. Clapp Effects of an introductory letter on response rates to a teen/parent telephone health survey Eval Rev 30 6 2006 817 823
2. S. Galea, and M. Tracy Participation rates in epidemiologic studies Ann Epidemiol 17 2007 643 653
3. E. von der Lippe, P. Schmich, and C. Lange Advance letters as a way of reducing non-response in a National Health Telephone Survey: differences between listed and unlisted numbers Surv Res Methods 5 3 2011 103 116
4. E. de Leeuw, M. Callegaro, J. Hox, E. Korendijk, and G. Lensvelt-Mulders The influence of advance letters on response in telephone surveys - a meta-analysis Public Opin Q 71 3 2007 413 443
5. E.D. de Leeuw, and J.J. Hox I am not selling anything: 29 experiments in telephone introductions Int J Publ Opin Res 16 4 2004 464 473
6. T.D. Koepsell, V. McGuire, W.T. Longstreth Jr., L.M. Nelson, and G. van Belle Randomized trial of leaving messages on telephone answering machines for control recruitment in an epidemiologic study Am J Epidemiol 144 1996 704 706
7. M. Callegaro, A.L. McCutcheon, and J. Ludwig Who's calling? the impact of caller ID on telephone survey response Field Methods 22 2 2010 175 191
8. S.E. Majowicz, V.L. Edge, J. Flint, P. Sockett, and K. Dore An introductory letter in advance of a telephone survey may increase response rate Can Commun Dis Rep 30 13 2004 121 123
9. R.C. Kessler, R.J.A. Little, and R.M. Groves Advances in strategies for minimizing and adjusting for survey nonresponse Epidemiol Rev 17 1995 192 204
10. D.A. Dillman, J.G. Gallegos, and J.H. Frey Reducing refusal rates for telephone interviews Public Opin Q 40 1976 66 78
11. B. Robertson, M. Sinclair, A. Forbes, M. Kirk, and C.K. Fairley The effect of an introductory letter on participation rates using telephone recruitment Aust N Z J Public Health 24 5 2000 552
12. N. Mitchell, C.E. Hewitt, E. Lenaghan, E. Platt, L. Shepstone, and D.J. Torgerson Prior notification of trial participants by newsletter increased response rates: a randomized controlled trial J Clin Epidemiol 65 2012 1348 1352
13. J.F. Etter, T.V. Perneger, and J.D. Laporte Unexpected effects of a prior feedback letter and a professional layout on the response rate to a mail survey in Geneva J Epidemiol Community Health 52 1998 128 129
14. A. Luiten Personalisation in advance letters does not always increase response rates: demographic correlates in a large scale experiment Surv Res Methods 5 1 2011 11 20
15. The American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) Standard definitions: final dispositions of case codes and outcome rates for surveys 7th ed. 2011 AAPOR Deerfield, IL
16. P. Hartge Raising response rates: getting to yes Epidemiology 10 1999 105 107