电子邮件还是普通邮件？关于哪种方式更适合调查的随机对照试验。
E-mail or snail mail? Randomized controlled trial on which works better for surveys.
作者信息
Seguin Rachelle, Godwin Marshall, MacDonald Susan, McCall Marnie
机构信息
Centre for Studies in Primary Care, Department of Family Medicine, Queen's University, Kingston, Ont.
出版信息
Can Fam Physician. 2004 Mar;50:414-9.
OBJECTIVE
To compare e-mail with regular mail for conducting surveys of physicians.
DESIGN
Randomized controlled trial.
SETTING
Ontario, Canada.
PARTICIPANTS
A random sample of physicians listed in the College of Family Physicians of Canada's membership database.
INTERVENTIONS
Survey delivered by e-mail and by post.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Response rates and times, and completeness and characteristics of responses to the survey.
RESULTS
Overall response rate was 44.7% (33.6% of e-mail recipients, 52.7% of post recipients who have e-mail, and 47.8% of post recipients without e-mail). While the e-mail rate was significantly lower than for both post groups, e-mail responses were received much faster. There was no significant difference among groups as to completeness of responses, but e-mail responses had more frequent and longer comments.
CONCLUSION
E-mail provides faster but fewer responses to surveys. Content of structured-response questions was similar in all groups, but e-mail provided more and longer responses to open-ended questions. Where a quick response to a survey is required, e-mail is superior.
目的
比较通过电子邮件与普通邮件对医生进行调查的情况。
设计
随机对照试验。
地点
加拿大安大略省。
参与者
从加拿大家庭医生学院会员数据库中列出的医生中随机抽取的样本。
干预措施
通过电子邮件和邮寄方式发放调查问卷。
主要观察指标
回复率、回复时间，以及调查问卷回复的完整性和特征。
结果
总体回复率为44.7%（电子邮件收件人的回复率为33.6%，有电子邮件的邮寄收件人的回复率为52.7%，无电子邮件的邮寄收件人的回复率为47.8%）。虽然电子邮件的回复率明显低于两个邮寄组，但电子邮件回复的接收速度要快得多。各组在回复的完整性方面没有显著差异，但电子邮件回复中的评论更频繁且更长。
结论
电子邮件对调查的回复速度更快，但数量更少。所有组中结构化问题的回答内容相似，但电子邮件对开放式问题的回复更多且更长。在需要对调查快速做出回复的情况下，电子邮件更具优势。
Zotero 插件