Pedrana Alisa, Hellard Margaret, Giles Michelle
Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health Research, Burnet Institute, 85 Commercial Road, Melbourne, Australia.
J Clin Epidemiol. 2008 Sep;61(9):896-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.01.004. Epub 2008 Jul 10.
The aim was to study the most effective method for increasing response rates to postal questionnaires by comparing normal post with registered mail and to assess the cost implications of the two mailing methods.
General Practitioners in Victoria (n=1,550) were randomized to receive a research questionnaire via either normal post or registered mail.
The overall response rate for the study after two reminders was 76.1% (1,179/1,550). After the initial mail out the response rate for the registered mail arm was 55.9% (n=433) compared to the normal post arm, 40.1% (n=311, P-value <0.001). After the first and second reminders the response rates dropped, registered mail obtained a response rate of 47.4% (n=162) and 37.8% (n=68), respectively, compared to a response rate of 28.0% (n=130) and 22.5% (n=75) for normal post. Overall, the cumulative response rate for the registered mail was greater, 85.6% (n=663) compared to 66.6% (n=516) for the normal post arm (P-value <0.001) There was a total cost difference between the registered and normal method of AUD $1,531.50.
Registered post when used for mail out of the initial questionnaire and all subsequent reminders is a more effective yet more expensive method for achieving a high response rate.
通过比较普通邮件和挂号信，研究提高邮寄问卷回复率的最有效方法，并评估两种邮寄方式的成本影响。
维多利亚州的全科医生（n = 1550）被随机分为通过普通邮件或挂号信接收研究问卷。
经过两次提醒后，研究的总体回复率为76.1%（1179/1550）。初次邮寄后，挂号信组的回复率为55.9%（n = 433），而普通邮件组为40.1%（n = 311，P值<0.001）。在第一次和第二次提醒后，回复率下降，挂号信的回复率分别为47.4%（n = 162）和37.8%（n = 68），而普通邮件的回复率分别为28.0%（n = 130）和22.5%（n = 75）。总体而言，挂号信的累积回复率更高，为85.6%（n = 663），而普通邮件组为66.6%（n = 516）（P值<0.001）。挂号信和普通邮件方式之间的总成本差异为1531.50澳元。
将挂号信用于初次问卷及所有后续提醒的邮寄，是实现高回复率的一种更有效但更昂贵的方法。
