Literature DB >> 10527007

The effects of lottery incentive and length of questionnaire on health survey response rates: a randomized study.

J S Kalantar1, N J Talley.   

Abstract

Maximizing the response rate of self-administered questionnaires is key in survey research. We aimed to evaluate the effects of lottery incentive and length of questionnaire on health survey response rates when used in isolation or combined. A random sample of 440 residents in Western Sydney, Australia was randomly allocated to four equal groups to receive or not receive an instant lottery ticket and a long (seven page) or short (one page) questionnaire. The overall response rate was 71.8%. The final response rates were higher among those receiving the short, rather than the long, questionnaire (75.6% versus 68.2%) (P = 0.08); and among those receiving the lottery incentive compared with those not receiving the incentive (75% versus 68.2%) (P = 0.09). By logistic regression analysis, the success of obtaining a completed questionnaire without any follow-up reminders was significantly associated with the lottery incentive but not the questionnaire length (P = 0.03 and P = 0.54, respectively). The difference between lottery and no lottery groups decreased gradually during the follow-up. A lottery incentive is associated with an increased response after the first mailing. A small up-front cost for a lottery ticket may be worthwhile, since it can save further costs by obviating the need for repeated follow-ups.

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10527007     DOI: 10.1016/s0895-4356(99)00051-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol        ISSN: 0895-4356            Impact factor:   6.437


  33 in total

1.  The effect of cash lottery on response rates to an online health survey among members of the Canadian Association of Retired Persons: a randomized experiment.

Authors:  Paul Doerfling; Jacek A Kopec; Matthew H Liang; John M Esdaile
Journal:  Can J Public Health       Date:  2010 May-Jun

2.  RSAS-3: validation of a very brief measure of Religious Commitment for use in health research.

Authors:  Andrea D Clements; Tifani R Fletcher; Natalie A Cyphers; Anna V Ermakova; Beth Bailey
Journal:  J Relig Health       Date:  2015-02

3.  Self-Reported Interest to Participate in a Health Survey if Different Amounts of Cash or Non-Monetary Incentive Types Were Offered.

Authors:  Guili Zheng; Sona Oksuzyan; Shelly Hsu; Jennifer Cloud; Mirna Ponce Jewell; Nirvi Shah; Lisa V Smith; Douglas Frye; Tony Kuo
Journal:  J Urban Health       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 3.671

4.  Lottery-based versus fixed incentives to increase clinicians' response to surveys.

Authors:  Scott D Halpern; Rachel Kohn; Aaron Dornbrand-Lo; Thomas Metkus; David A Asch; Kevin G Volpp
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2011-04-14       Impact factor: 3.402

5.  Assessing corporate social responsibility in China's sports lottery administration and its influence on consumption behavior.

Authors:  Hai Li; James J Zhang; Luke Lunhua Mao; Sophia D Min
Journal:  J Gambl Stud       Date:  2012-09

6.  A pilot, multisite, randomized controlled trial of a self-directed coping skills training intervention for couples facing prostate cancer: accrual, retention, and data collection issues.

Authors:  Sylvie D Lambert; Patrick McElduff; Afaf Girgis; Janelle V Levesque; Tim W Regan; Jane Turner; Hayley Candler; Cathrine Mihalopoulos; Sophy T F Shih; Karen Kayser; Peter Chong
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2015-07-17       Impact factor: 3.603

7.  Validation of the HOOS, JR: A Short-form Hip Replacement Survey.

Authors:  Stephen Lyman; Yuo-Yu Lee; Patricia D Franklin; Wenjun Li; David J Mayman; Douglas E Padgett
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2016-02-29       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Low socioeconomic class is a risk factor for upper and lower gastrointestinal symptoms: a population based study in 15 000 Australian adults.

Authors:  P Bytzer; S Howell; M Leemon; L J Young; M P Jones; N J Talley
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 23.059

9.  Response rates to a mailed survey of a representative sample of cancer patients randomly drawn from the Pennsylvania Cancer Registry: a randomized trial of incentive and length effects.

Authors:  Bridget J Kelly; Taressa K Fraze; Robert C Hornik
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2010-07-14       Impact factor: 4.615

10.  Evaluating a Modular Design Approach to Collecting Survey Data Using Text Messages.

Authors:  Brady T West; Dirgha Ghimire; William G Axinn
Journal:  Surv Res Methods       Date:  2015
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.