Deehan A, Templeton L, Taylor C, Drummond C, Strang J
National Addiction Centre, London.
Br J Gen Pract. 1997 Feb;47(415):87-90.
Low response rates are acknowledged as a potential source of bias in survey results. Response rates are a particular problem in surveys of GPs. Thus, the methods used to encourage response to mailed surveys and the influence of inducements in maximizing response rates are fundamental issues to be examined when addressing the problem of response bias.
To increase the overall response rate to a national study of GPs and to explore the effects of financial and non-financial inducements on response rates.
Two mailing waves of a postal questionnaire to a 20% random sample of all GPs in England and Wales had achieved a 33% response rate. For the third mailing wave, the non-responding GPs were then divided into a control group, a group who were offered a donation to charity to complete the questionnaire and a group who were offered cash. The charity and cash groups were further subdivided into 5 pounds and 10 pounds groups to assess the effect of the size of the inducement offered. For the control group, a fourth wave was sent the offer of a 5 pounds or 10 pounds incentive.
Response was positively affected by the offer of an inducement. Cash, however, had a more substantial effect than the offer of a donation to charity. Older GPs were less likely to participate overall, whereas male GPs were more likely to respond to a cash inducement. Doctors who had seen more patients were less likely to reply earlier and were more likely to respond to the offer of cash.
Primary care is going through many changes, some of which have increased the workload of the GP. It may now be that, to achieve the response rates needed to validate policy-related research, the offer of inducements will become a necessary part of the research process.
低回复率被认为是调查结果中潜在的偏差来源。回复率在全科医生调查中是一个特别的问题。因此,在解决回复偏差问题时,用于鼓励对邮寄调查问卷做出回复的方法以及诱导因素对最大化回复率的影响是需要研究的基本问题。
提高一项针对全科医生的全国性研究的总体回复率,并探讨经济和非经济诱导因素对回复率的影响。
向英格兰和威尔士所有全科医生的20%随机样本邮寄两轮邮政调查问卷,回复率为33%。对于第三轮邮寄,未回复的全科医生被分为一个对照组、一个被提供向慈善机构捐款以完成问卷的组和一个被提供现金的组。慈善组和现金组进一步细分为5英镑组和10英镑组,以评估所提供诱导因素的大小的影响。对于对照组,发送第四轮邮件,提供5英镑或10英镑的激励。
诱导因素的提供对回复有积极影响。然而,现金比向慈善机构捐款的影响更大。总体而言,年长的全科医生参与的可能性较小,而男性全科医生对现金诱导的反应更积极。看过更多患者的医生更早回复的可能性较小,对现金诱导的反应更积极。
初级医疗正在经历许多变化,其中一些变化增加了全科医生的工作量。现在可能是,为了实现验证与政策相关研究所需的回复率,提供诱导因素将成为研究过程的必要组成部分。