Burr William H, Gottschlich Elizabeth A, Kist Tylar W, Somberg Chloe A, Frintner Mary P, Cull William L
Department of Research, American Academy of Pediatrics, Itasca, Ill.
Department of Research, American Academy of Pediatrics, Itasca, Ill.
Acad Pediatr. 2025 Mar;25(2):102583. doi: 10.1016/j.acap.2024.09.007. Epub 2024 Sep 23.
Our objectives were to examine the following: physician survey response rates across a 20-year period; the impact of a token incentive on response rates; whether survey nonresponse bias is present and if it is associated with response rate; and the impact of a token incentive on nonresponse bias.
We utilized data from 68 American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) pediatrician surveys from 2000 to 2019 and an AAP administrative database, which included information for both respondents and non-respondents (target sample). Linear regression examined response rates over time. To assess nonresponse bias, a t-test or Wilcoxon rank test compared respondents and the target sample by age, gender, and US Census region. Linear regression or Spearman correlation examined the association of response rate and nonresponse bias. Interrupted time series analyses tested the introduction of a $2 token incentive on both response rates and nonresponse bias.
Overall mean survey response rate was 56.2%. Response rates declined across survey years (β = -0.58, P < 0.001). The $2 incentive generated an 8.7% response rate increase (P < 0.001). The respondent groups had more female pediatricians than the target samples (62.5% vs 60.1%, P < 0.001). Age nonresponse bias was associated with lower response rates (β = -0.47, P < 0.001). The $2 incentive was associated with nonresponse bias shifts toward older, away from female, and away from Northeastern respondents.
Our study demonstrates an overall decline in pediatrician survey response rates and a meaningful impact of a token incentive on response rates and nonresponse bias, underscoring the importance of measuring nonresponse bias whenever possible.
我们的目的是研究以下内容:20年间医生调查的回复率;象征性激励对回复率的影响;调查无应答偏差是否存在以及它是否与回复率相关;以及象征性激励对无应答偏差的影响。
我们利用了2000年至2019年美国儿科学会(AAP)68次儿科医生调查的数据以及一个AAP管理数据库,该数据库包含了受访者和未受访者(目标样本)的信息。线性回归分析了随时间变化的回复率。为了评估无应答偏差,通过t检验或Wilcoxon秩和检验按年龄、性别和美国人口普查区域比较了受访者和目标样本。线性回归或Spearman相关性分析了回复率与无应答偏差之间的关联。中断时间序列分析测试了引入2美元象征性激励对回复率和无应答偏差的影响。
总体平均调查回复率为56.2%。回复率在各调查年份呈下降趋势(β = -0.58,P < 0.001)。2美元的激励使回复率提高了8.7%(P < 0.001)。受访者群体中的女性儿科医生比目标样本多(62.5%对60.1%,P < 0.001)。年龄无应答偏差与较低的回复率相关(β = -0.47,P < 0.001)。2美元的激励与无应答偏差向年龄较大、远离女性以及远离东北部受访者的方向转变有关。
我们的研究表明儿科医生调查回复率总体下降,象征性激励对回复率和无应答偏差有显著影响,强调了尽可能测量无应答偏差的重要性。