Alves D W, Szucs P A
Department of Emergency Medicine, Box #8, Morristown Memorial Hospital, Morristown, NJ 07960, USA.
Am J Emerg Med. 2001 May;19(3):192-5. doi: 10.1053/ajem.2001.21714.
Escalating costs of research combined with increasing use of e-mail by emergency physicians (EP), justifies studying whether electronic surveying (ES) is a valid methodology for research. Our primary study object is to delineate the demographics of EP with e-mail. Secondary objectives are to ascertain ES response rates and to identify response bias between "individual" versus "bulk" e-mailings. The 1999 American College of Emergency Physicians Membership Guide identified a pool of e-mail addresses. Of the 1,752 EP surveyed, 1,386 (79%) had valid e-mail addresses and 574 responded. A response rate of 41% questions the validity of ES for research. Demographic data of EP regarding mean age (38.2 years); gender (82.4% men); title (86.8% MD); practice (87% ED); practice location (49.6% urban); training (56% EM residency); research participation (65.5%); screening e-mail (7%); is representative of EP overall. Finally, comparison of individual versus bulk e-mail to survey participants showed a 13.6% (5.5-21.7; 95% CI) improvement in overall response.
研究成本不断攀升，加之急诊医生越来越多地使用电子邮件，这使得研究电子调查是否为一种有效的研究方法变得合理。我们的主要研究目标是描绘通过电子邮件联系的急诊医生的人口统计学特征。次要目标是确定电子调查的回复率，并识别“个人”与“批量”电子邮件发送之间的回复偏差。1999年美国急诊医师学会会员指南确定了一组电子邮件地址。在接受调查的1752名急诊医生中，1386人（79%）拥有有效的电子邮件地址，574人回复。41%的回复率让人质疑电子调查用于研究的有效性。急诊医生的人口统计学数据包括平均年龄（38.2岁）；性别（82.4%为男性）；职称（86.8%为医学博士）；执业类型（87%为急诊科）；执业地点（49.6%在城市）；培训情况（56%接受过急诊医学住院医师培训）；参与研究情况（65.5%）；筛选电子邮件情况（7%），总体上代表了急诊医生的情况。最后，对调查参与者进行的个人电子邮件与批量电子邮件的比较显示，总体回复率提高了13.6%（5.5 - 21.7；95%置信区间）。
