Suppr超能文献

一项针对执业医师的在线调查中极低的回复率。

A very low response rate in an on-line survey of medical practitioners.

作者信息

Aitken Campbell, Power Robert, Dwyer Robyn

机构信息

Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health Research, Macfarlane Burnet Institute for Medical Research and Public Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.

出版信息

Aust N Z J Public Health. 2008 Jun;32(3):288-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1753-6405.2008.00232.x.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To report on the response rate achieved in a survey of medical practitioners and discuss the reasons for it.

METHOD

An on-line (internet-based) survey of all 609 registered pharmacotherapy prescribers in Victoria and Queensland; invitations to participate were sent by mail in late April 2007, and one reminder letter in late May 2007.

RESULTS

Six hundred and nine invitation letters were mailed, nine were returned to sender, and 52 questionnaires completed, making the overall response rate 52/600 = 8.7%. The response rate in Queensland was 13.2% (16/121), and in Victoria 7.5% (36/479).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite utilising sound techniques, our response rate was much lower than those achieved in recent Australian paper-based surveys of medical practitioners. It is possible that the issue being addressed (injecting-related injuries and diseases) was not of high priority for many invitees, leading to reduced response.

IMPLICATIONS

On-line surveys are not yet an effective method of collecting data from Australian medical practitioners; researchers should continue to use paper questionnaires for maximum response.

摘要

目的

报告一项针对执业医师的调查所取得的回复率,并探讨其原因。

方法

对维多利亚州和昆士兰州的所有609名注册药物治疗开方者进行在线(基于互联网)调查;2007年4月下旬通过邮件发送参与邀请,并于2007年5月下旬发送一封催复信。

结果

共邮寄了609封邀请信,9封被退回,52份问卷被完成,总体回复率为52/600 = 8.7%。昆士兰州的回复率为13.2%(16/121),维多利亚州为7.5%(36/479)。

结论

尽管采用了合理的技术,但我们的回复率远低于近期澳大利亚针对执业医师进行的纸质调查所取得的回复率。有可能许多受邀者认为所涉及的问题(注射相关损伤和疾病)并非高度优先事项,从而导致回复率降低。

启示

在线调查尚未成为从澳大利亚执业医师收集数据的有效方法;研究人员应继续使用纸质问卷以获得最高回复率。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验