NIHR Policy Research Unit in Maternal and Neonatal Health and Care, National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK.
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2023 Jan 12;23(1):10. doi: 10.1186/s12874-023-01833-8.
Novel survey methods are needed to tackle declining response rates. The 2020 National Maternity Survey included a randomised controlled trial (RCT) and social media survey to compare different combinations of sampling and data collection methods with respect to: response rate, respondent representativeness, prevalence estimates of maternity indicators and cost.
A two-armed parallel RCT and concurrent social media survey were conducted. Women in the RCT were sampled from ONS birth registrations and randomised to either a paper or push-to-web survey. Women in the social media survey self-selected through online adverts. The primary outcome was response rate in the paper and push-to-web surveys. In all surveys, respondent representativeness was assessed by comparing distributions of sociodemographic characteristics in respondents with those of the target population. External validity of prevalence estimates of maternity indicators was assessed by comparing weighted survey estimates with estimates from national routine data. Cost was also compared across surveys.
The response rate was higher in the paper survey (n = 2,446) compared to the push-to-web survey (n = 2,165)(30.6% versus 27.1%, difference = 3.5%, 95%CI = 2.1-4.9, p < 0.0001). Compared to the target population, respondents in all surveys were less likely to be aged < 25 years, of Black or Minority ethnicity, born outside the UK, living in disadvantaged areas, living without a partner and primiparous. Women in the social media survey (n = 1,316) were less representative of the target population compared to women in the paper and push-to-web surveys. For some maternity indicators, weighted survey estimates were close to estimates from routine data, for other indicators there were discrepancies; no survey demonstrated consistently higher external validity than the other two surveys. Compared to the paper survey, the cost saving per respondent was £5.45 for the push-to-web survey and £22.42 for the social media survey.
Push-to-web surveys may cost less than paper surveys but do not necessarily result in higher response rates. Social media surveys cost significantly less than paper and push-to-web surveys, but sample size may be limited by eligibility criteria and recruitment window and respondents may be less representative of the target population. However, reduced representativeness does not necessarily introduce more bias in weighted survey estimates.
需要新的调查方法来应对不断下降的回应率。2020 年全国产妇调查包括一项随机对照试验 (RCT) 和社交媒体调查，旨在比较不同的抽样和数据收集方法组合在以下方面的效果：回应率、应答者代表性、产妇指标的流行率估计值和成本。
进行了一项两臂平行 RCT 和同期社交媒体调查。RCT 中的女性从 ONS 出生登记中抽取，并随机分配到纸质或推送到网络的调查中。社交媒体调查中的女性通过在线广告自行选择。主要结果是纸质和推送到网络调查中的回应率。在所有调查中，通过比较应答者与目标人群的社会人口特征分布来评估应答者的代表性。通过比较加权调查估计值与来自国家常规数据的估计值来评估产妇指标的流行率估计值的外部有效性。还比较了各调查的成本。
纸质调查（n=2446）的回应率高于推送到网络调查（n=2165）（30.6%比 27.1%，差异=3.5%，95%置信区间=2.1-4.9，p<0.0001）。与目标人群相比，所有调查中的应答者更不可能年龄<25 岁、属于黑人或少数族裔、在英国以外出生、居住在贫困地区、没有伴侣和初产妇。与纸质和推送到网络调查中的女性相比，社交媒体调查中的女性（n=1316）对目标人群的代表性较差。对于一些产妇指标，加权调查估计值接近常规数据的估计值，对于其他指标则存在差异；没有一种调查方法始终比其他两种调查方法具有更高的外部有效性。与纸质调查相比，推送到网络调查的每位受访者成本节省 5.45 英镑，社交媒体调查的成本节省 22.42 英镑。
推送到网络的调查可能比纸质调查成本低，但不一定会导致更高的回应率。社交媒体调查的成本明显低于纸质和推送到网络的调查，但由于资格标准和招募窗口的限制，样本量可能有限，并且应答者可能对目标人群的代表性较差。然而，代表性的降低不一定会在加权调查估计值中引入更多偏差。
