Literature DB >> 11101549

Assessing research outcomes by postal questionnaire with telephone follow-up. TOTAL Study Group. Trial of Occupational Therapy and Leisure.

C Parker1, M Dewey.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Face-to-face assessment of research outcomes is expensive and may introduce bias. Postal questionnaires offer a cheaper alternative which avoids observer bias, but non-response and incomplete response reduce the effective sample size and may be equally serious sources of bias. This study examines the extent and potential effects of missing data in the postal collection of outcomes for a large rehabilitation trial.
METHODS: Questionnaires containing a number of established scales were posted to participants in a trial of occupational therapy after stroke. Response was maximized by telephone and postal reminders, and incomplete questionnaires were followed up by telephone. Scale scores obtained by imputing values to questionnaire items missing on return were compared with those achieved by telephone follow-up.
FINDINGS: Response to the initial posting was 60%, rising to 85% after reminders. Participants receiving the experimental treatment were more likely to respond without a reminder. There were no significant differences on any known factors between eventual responders and non-responders. Of the questionnaires, 43% were incomplete on return: partial responders were significantly different to complete responders on baseline disability and home circumstances. Of the incomplete questionnaires, 71% were resolved by telephone follow-up. In these, the scale scores achieved by telephone were generally higher than those derived by conventional imputation.
CONCLUSION: Postal outcome assessment achieved a good response rate, but considerable effort was needed to minimize non-response and incomplete response, both of which could have been serious sources of bias.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11101549     DOI: 10.1093/ije/29.6.1065

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Epidemiol        ISSN: 0300-5771            Impact factor:   7.196


  15 in total

1.  Determinants of response in a longitudinal health study following the firework-disaster in Enschede, The Netherlands.

Authors:  Marieke B A Dijkema; Linda Grievink; Rebecca K Stellato; Jan Roorda; Peter G van der Velden
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 8.082

2.  Randomised controlled trial of an occupational therapy intervention to increase outdoor mobility after stroke.

Authors:  P A Logan; J R F Gladman; A Avery; M F Walker; J Dyas; L Groom
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-11-25

3.  The Elbow Self-Assessment Score (ESAS): development and validation of a new patient-reported outcome measurement tool for elbow disorders.

Authors:  Marc Beirer; Henrik Friese; Andreas Lenich; Moritz Crönlein; Gunther H Sandmann; Peter Biberthaler; Chlodwig Kirchhoff; Sebastian Siebenlist
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2015-05-17       Impact factor: 4.342

4.  Recruiting older people to a randomised controlled dietary intervention trial--how hard can it be?

Authors:  Sarah E Forster; Laura Jones; John M Saxton; Daniel J Flower; Gemma Foulds; Hilary J Powers; Stuart G Parker; A Graham Pockley; Elizabeth A Williams
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2010-02-22       Impact factor: 4.615

5.  Would loss to follow-up bias the outcome evaluation of patients operated for degenerative disorders of the lumbar spine?

Authors:  Tore K Solberg; Andreas Sørlie; Kristin Sjaavik; Øystein P Nygaard; Tor Ingebrigtsen
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2010-12-29       Impact factor: 3.717

6.  Telephone interviews and online questionnaires can be used to improve neurodevelopmental follow-up rates.

Authors:  Samantha Johnson; Sarah E Seaton; Bradley N Manktelow; Lucy K Smith; David Field; Elizabeth S Draper; Neil Marlow; Elaine M Boyle
Journal:  BMC Res Notes       Date:  2014-04-08

7.  Validation of a survey methodology for gastroesophageal reflux disease in China.

Authors:  Yang Cao; Xiaoyan Yan; Xiu-Qiang Ma; Rui Wang; Saga Johansson; Mari-Ann Wallander; Jia He
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2008-08-21       Impact factor: 3.067

8.  Does it matter whether the recipient of patient questionnaires in general practice is the general practitioner or an independent researcher? The REPLY randomised trial.

Authors:  James A Desborough; Peter Butters; Debi Bhattacharya; Richard C Holland; David J Wright
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2008-06-27       Impact factor: 4.615

9.  The clinical and cost-benefits of investing in neurobehavioural rehabilitation: a multi-centre study.

Authors:  Michael Oddy; Sara da Silva Ramos
Journal:  Brain Inj       Date:  2013-10-02       Impact factor: 2.311

10.  The Munich Wrist Questionnaire (MWQ) - development and validation of a new patient-reported outcome measurement tool for wrist disorders.

Authors:  Marc Beirer; Julian Serly; Helen Vester; Dominik Pförringer; Moritz Crönlein; Stephan Deiler; Peter Biberthaler; Chlodwig Kirchhoff
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2016-04-14       Impact factor: 2.362

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.