文献检索文档翻译深度研究
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
邀请有礼套餐&价格历史记录

新学期,新优惠

限时优惠:9月1日-9月22日

30天高级会员仅需29元

1天体验卡首发特惠仅需5.99元

了解详情
不再提醒
插件&应用
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
高级版
套餐订阅购买积分包
AI 工具
文献检索文档翻译深度研究
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2025

一项随机试验表明,电子提醒可减少对邮寄问卷的响应时间。

A randomized trial of electronic reminders showed a reduction in the time to respond to postal questionnaires.

机构信息

Department of Health Sciences, York Trials Unit, Area 4, Seebohm Rowntree Building, The University of York, Heslington, York YO10 5DD, UK.

出版信息

J Clin Epidemiol. 2011 Feb;64(2):208-12. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.01.020. Epub 2010 Jun 15.


DOI:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.01.020
PMID:20554428
Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of electronic reminders (ERs) on response rate and time to response for the return of postal questionnaires. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: This open randomized controlled trial (RCT) was conducted at the University of York. Participants who were taking part in an established RCT and who provided an electronic mail address and/or mobile telephone number were eligible to take part in the study. The intervention group received ERs on the day they were expected to receive postal questionnaires. RESULTS: One hundred forty-eight participants (19 male and 129 female) aged 47±11 (range, 19-65) years were studied. About 89.2% of participants returned postal questionnaires. There was no difference in questionnaire response rates in control (64 of 74 [86.5%]) vs. intervention (68 of 74 [91.9%]), groups (relative risk=1.063, 95% confidence interval: 0.949-1.189). Median questionnaire time to response was 4 days less in the intervention group (10.0±0.2; range, 10-14 days) compared with the control group (14.0±1.4; range, 10-23 days) (χ(2)(1df)=5.27, P=0.022). CONCLUSION: ERs are useful tools for reducing participant time to response for postal questionnaires. We found little evidence for an effect of ERs on response rate for postal questionnaires.

摘要

目的:评估电子提醒(ER)对邮寄问卷回复率和回复时间的影响。

研究设计和设置:这是一项在约克大学进行的开放性随机对照试验(RCT)。符合条件的参与者为正在参与既定 RCT 且提供电子邮件地址和/或手机号码的参与者。干预组在预计收到邮寄问卷的当天收到 ER。

结果:研究共纳入 148 名参与者(19 名男性和 129 名女性),年龄 47±11(范围,19-65)岁。约 89.2%的参与者返回了邮寄问卷。对照组(74 人中有 64 人[86.5%])和干预组(74 人中有 68 人[91.9%])的问卷回复率无差异(相对风险=1.063,95%置信区间:0.949-1.189)。干预组问卷回复时间中位数比对照组少 4 天(干预组 10.0±0.2;范围,10-14 天;对照组 14.0±1.4;范围,10-23 天)(χ(2)(1df)=5.27,P=0.022)。

结论:ER 是减少邮寄问卷参与者回复时间的有用工具。我们几乎没有发现 ER 对邮寄问卷回复率有影响的证据。

相似文献

[1]
A randomized trial of electronic reminders showed a reduction in the time to respond to postal questionnaires.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2010-6-15

[2]
Electronic reminders did not improve postal questionnaire response rates or response times: a randomized controlled trial.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2011-2-2

[3]
Postal surveys of physicians gave superior response rates over telephone interviews in a randomized trial.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2006-5

[4]
Increasing response to a postal survey of sedentary patients - a randomised controlled trial [ISRCTN45665423].

BMC Health Serv Res. 2004-11-10

[5]
The effectiveness of computer reminders versus postal reminders for improving quality assessment for point-of-care testing in primary care: a randomized controlled trial.

J Eval Clin Pract. 2015-2

[6]
A randomized trial found online questionnaires supplemented by postal reminders generated a cost-effective and generalizable sample but don't forget the reminders.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2017-12

[7]
No difference demonstrated between faxed or mailed prenotification in promoting questionnaire response among family physicians: a randomized controlled trial.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2012-5

[8]
A comparison of data quality and practicality of online versus postal questionnaires in a sample of testicular cancer survivors.

Psychooncology. 2011-9-26

[9]
Electronic mail was not better than postal mail for surveying residents and faculty.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2005-4

[10]
Effect of e-mail versus postal reminders for mammogram screening.

AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2006

引用本文的文献

[1]
Biomarker Driven Antifungal Stewardship (BioDriveAFS) in acute leukaemia-a multi-centre randomised controlled trial to assess clinical and cost effectiveness: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Trials. 2024-6-28

[2]
Surgical versus non-surgical management of lateral compression type-1 pelvic fracture in adults 60 years and older: the L1FE RCT.

Health Technol Assess. 2024-3

[3]
Methods to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023-11-30

[4]
Pre-notifications increase retention in a 17-year follow-up of adolescents born very preterm.

Trials. 2023-7-26

[5]
Lateral compression type 1 fracture fixation in the elderly (L1FE): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial (with internal pilot) comparing the effects of INFIX surgery and non-surgical management for treating patients with lateral compression type 1 (LC-1) fragility fractures.

Trials. 2023-2-2

[6]
Randomised study within a trial (SWAT) to evaluate personalised versus standard text message prompts for increasing trial participant response to postal questionnaires (PROMPTS).

Trials. 2021-7-28

[7]
Strategies to improve retention in randomised trials.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021-3-6

[8]
A multicentre, randomized, parallel group, superiority study to compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of external frame versus internal locking plate for complete articular pilon fracture fixation in adults.

Bone Jt Open. 2021-3

[9]
Surgical treatments compared with early structured physiotherapy in secondary care for adults with primary frozen shoulder: the UK FROST three-arm RCT.

Health Technol Assess. 2020-12

[10]
Digital tools for the recruitment and retention of participants in randomised controlled trials: a systematic map.

Trials. 2020-6-5

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

推荐工具

医学文档翻译智能文献检索