Suppr超能文献

增加再次联系以提高回复率是否能提高医生调查数据的质量?

Do additional recontacts to increase response rate improve physician survey data quality?

机构信息

*National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD †American Cancer Society Inc., Atlanta, GA ‡Westat, Rockville, MD.

出版信息

Med Care. 2013 Oct;51(10):945-8. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3182a5023d.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Although response rates for physician surveys have been decreasing, it is not clear whether this trend is associated with an increase in survey nonresponse bias. One means for assessing potential bias is to conduct a level-of-effort analysis that compares data estimates for respondents interviewed during the first recruitment contact to respondents interviewed at later recontact cycles.

METHODS

We compared early and later responders within the Survey of Physician Attitudes Regarding the Care of Cancer Survivors with respect to both demographic characteristics and aggregate survey responses to items on survivor care knowledge, attitudes, and practices.

RESULTS

Accumulating additional completions across each of 4 respondent contact attempts improved weighted response rates (35.0%, 46.9%, 52.3%, and 57.6%, respectively). However, the majority of estimates for analyzed variables remained relatively unchanged over additional cycles of recontact.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that additional respondent recontact attempts, especially beyond a single recontact, had little influence on key data distributions, suggesting that these were ineffective in reducing nonresponse bias. Further, the conduct of additional recruitment recontacts was an inefficient means for increasing statistical power. For the conduct of physician surveys, a practice that may in some cases be cost-effective, while also controlling total survey error, is to establish a larger initial sample; to either eliminate nonresponse follow-up or to limit this to one recontact; and to accept a somewhat lower final overall survey response rate.

摘要

背景

尽管医生调查的回复率一直在下降,但尚不清楚这种趋势是否与调查无回应偏差的增加有关。评估潜在偏差的一种方法是进行努力程度分析,该分析比较了在第一次招募联系期间接受采访的受访者和在以后的再联系周期中接受采访的受访者的数据估计值。

方法

我们比较了癌症幸存者护理态度调查中早期和晚期的应答者,比较了受访者的人口统计学特征以及对幸存者护理知识、态度和实践项目的综合调查回应。

结果

在每次受访者联系尝试中增加额外的完成量,提高了加权回复率(分别为 35.0%、46.9%、52.3%和 57.6%)。然而,在额外的再联系周期中,大多数分析变量的估计值基本保持不变。

结论

我们得出结论,额外的受访者再联系尝试,尤其是超过一次的再联系尝试,对关键数据分布几乎没有影响,这表明这些尝试在减少无回应偏差方面效果不佳。此外,进行额外的招募再联系是提高统计能力的一种低效手段。对于医生调查的进行,一种在某些情况下可能具有成本效益的做法,同时也控制总调查误差,是建立一个更大的初始样本;要么消除无回应后续行动,要么将其限制在一次再联系;并接受稍低的最终总体调查回复率。

相似文献

1
Do additional recontacts to increase response rate improve physician survey data quality?
Med Care. 2013 Oct;51(10):945-8. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3182a5023d.
3
Nonresponse bias in a mail survey of physicians.
Eval Health Prof. 2007 Jun;30(2):170-85. doi: 10.1177/0163278707300632.
4
A two-phase sampling survey for nonresponse and its paradata to correct nonresponse bias in a health surveillance survey.
Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique. 2017 Feb;65(1):71-79. doi: 10.1016/j.respe.2016.10.059. Epub 2017 Jan 17.
5
Getting physicians to open the survey: little evidence that an envelope teaser increases response rates.
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012 Mar 31;12:41. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-12-41.
6
Mixing web and mail methods in a survey of physicians.
Health Serv Res. 2007 Jun;42(3 Pt 1):1219-34. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00652.x.
8
Assessment of nonresponse bias in an internet survey of alcohol use.
Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2004 Apr;28(4):630-4. doi: 10.1097/01.alc.0000121654.99277.26.
9
Geographic Information System mapping as a tool to assess nonresponse bias in survey research.
Res Social Adm Pharm. 2007 Sep;3(3):249-64. doi: 10.1016/j.sapharm.2006.10.001.
10

引用本文的文献

2
Methods to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Nov 30;11(11):MR000008. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000008.pub5.
3
Educator's blueprint: A how-to guide on survey administration.
AEM Educ Train. 2023 Sep 15;7(5):e10906. doi: 10.1002/aet2.10906. eCollection 2023 Oct.
4
8
Combining Internet-Based and Postal Survey Methods in a Survey among Gynecologists: Results of a Randomized Trial.
Health Serv Res. 2018 Apr;53(2):879-895. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12664. Epub 2017 Feb 19.
10
Perceived Barriers to Implementing Individual Choosing Wisely Recommendations in Two National Surveys of Primary Care Providers.
J Gen Intern Med. 2017 Feb;32(2):210-217. doi: 10.1007/s11606-016-3853-5. Epub 2016 Sep 6.

本文引用的文献

1
Health care provider surveys in the United States, 2000-2010: a review.
Eval Health Prof. 2013 Mar;36(1):106-26. doi: 10.1177/0163278712474001.
2
Response rates and nonresponse errors in surveys.
JAMA. 2012 May 2;307(17):1805-6. doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.3532.
3
Differences between primary care physicians' and oncologists' knowledge, attitudes and practices regarding the care of cancer survivors.
J Gen Intern Med. 2011 Dec;26(12):1403-10. doi: 10.1007/s11606-011-1808-4. Epub 2011 Jul 22.
4
Methodologies for improving response rates in surveys of physicians: a systematic review.
Eval Health Prof. 2007 Dec;30(4):303-21. doi: 10.1177/0163278707307899.
5
Impact of differential response rates on the quality of data collected in the CTS physician survey.
Eval Health Prof. 2003 Mar;26(1):23-42. doi: 10.1177/0163278702250077.
7
Physician response to surveys. A review of the literature.
Am J Prev Med. 2001 Jan;20(1):61-7. doi: 10.1016/s0749-3797(00)00258-0.
8
Interviewing physicians: the effect of improved response rate.
Am J Public Health. 1985 Nov;75(11):1338-40. doi: 10.2105/ajph.75.11.1338.

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