Hoffman S C, Burke A E, Helzlsouer K J, Comstock G W
Department of Epidemiology, School of Hygiene and Public Health, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Am J Epidemiol. 1998 Nov 15;148(10):1007-11. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009566.
Mailed questionnaires are an economical method of data collection for epidemiologic studies, but response tends to be lower than for telephone or personal interviews. As part of a follow-up study of volunteers who provided a brief health history and blood sample for a blood specimen bank in 1989, the authors conducted a controlled trial of the effect of length, incentives, and follow-up techniques on response to a mailed questionnaire. Interventions tested included variations on length of the questionnaire, effect of a monetary incentive, and effect of a postcard reminder versus a letter accompanied by a second questionnaire. Response was similar for the short (16-item, 4-page) and long (76-item, 16-page) questionnaire groups. The non-monetary [corrected] incentive did not improve the frequency of response. The second mailing of a questionnaire was significantly better than a postcard reminder in improving responses (23% vs. 10%). It is important to systematically test marketing principles to determine which techniques are effective in increasing response to mailed questionnaires for epidemiologic studies.
邮寄问卷是流行病学研究中一种经济的数据收集方法，但回复率往往低于电话访谈或个人访谈。作为对1989年为一个血液样本库提供简要健康史和血样的志愿者进行的随访研究的一部分，作者进行了一项对照试验，研究问卷长度、激励措施和随访技术对邮寄问卷回复率的影响。测试的干预措施包括问卷长度的变化、金钱激励的效果，以及明信片提醒与附带第二份问卷的信件的效果。简短（16项，4页）问卷组和冗长（76项，16页）问卷组的回复率相似。非金钱激励措施并未提高回复频率。在提高回复率方面，第二次邮寄问卷明显优于明信片提醒（23%对10%）。系统地测试营销原则，以确定哪些技术能有效提高流行病学研究中邮寄问卷的回复率，这一点很重要。
