Literature DB >> 11723348

E-mail versus conventional postal mail survey of geriatric chiefs.

D B Raziano1, R Jayadevappa, D Valenzula, M Weiner, R Lavizzo-Mourey.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: This study compared the response time, response rate, and cost of two types of survey administration techniques: e-mail/web-based versus conventional postal mail. The main aim of the survey was to collect descriptive information on the existence of Acute Care for Elders units and their characteristics by surveying geriatric division chiefs. DESIGN AND METHODS: Two randomized cohorts of geriatric division chiefs were formed to receive a survey either by electronic mail (n = 57) or by conventional postal mail (n = 57). If there was no response to the initial mailing, two follow-up mailings were sent to both groups using the original modality; a third follow-up was performed using the alternative modality. For each group, response rate and response time were calculated. The average total cost was computed and compared across two groups.
RESULTS: The aggregate response rate was 58% (n = 31) for the e-mail group versus 77% (n = 44) for the postal mail group. The overall average response time was shorter in the e-mail group, 18 days compared with 33 days for the conventional postal mailing group. The cost comparison showed that average cost was $7.70 for the e-mail group, compared to $10.50 per response for the conventional mail group. IMPLICATIONS: It appears that although the web-based technology is gaining popularity and leads to lower cost per response, the conventional postal method of surveying continues to deliver a better response rate among the geriatric medicine division chiefs. The web-based approach holds promise given its lower costs and acceptable response rate combined with the shorter response time.

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11723348     DOI: 10.1093/geront/41.6.799

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gerontologist        ISSN: 0016-9013


  21 in total

1.  Colorectal cancer screening perceptions and practices: results from a national survey of gastroenterology, surgery and radiology trainees.

Authors:  Amy S Oxentenko; Robert A Vierkant; Darrell S Pardi; David R Farley; Eric J Dozois; Thomas E Hartman; David M Hough; Wesley O Petersen; Carrie N Klabunde; Katherine Sharpe; John H Bond; Robert A Smith; Bernard Levin; John B Pope; Paul C Schroy; Paul J Limburg
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 2.037

2.  Combining web-based and mail surveys improves response rates: a PBRN study from PRIME Net.

Authors:  Philip J Kroth; Laurie McPherson; Robert Leverence; Wilson Pace; Elvan Daniels; Robert L Rhyne; Robert L Williams
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2009 May-Jun       Impact factor: 5.166

Review 3.  A guide for the design and conduct of self-administered surveys of clinicians.

Authors:  Karen E A Burns; Mark Duffett; Michelle E Kho; Maureen O Meade; Neill K J Adhikari; Tasnim Sinuff; Deborah J Cook
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2008-07-29       Impact factor: 8.262

4.  How to assess a survey in surgery.

Authors:  Achilleas Thoma; Sylvie D Cornacchi; Forough Farrokhyar; Mohit Bhandari; Charlie H Goldsmith
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 2.089

5.  Incorporating CanMEDS and subspecialty training into paediatric residency programs: Why are we still deficient?

Authors:  Gautam Kumar; Andrew Ni; Sarah E Lawrence; Asif Doja
Journal:  Paediatr Child Health       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 2.253

6.  Electronic data collection options for practice-based research networks.

Authors:  Wilson D Pace; Elizabeth W Staton
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2005 May-Jun       Impact factor: 5.166

7.  Diverse recruitment strategies result in different participation percentages in a web-based study, but in similar compliance.

Authors:  Manas K Akmatov; Nicole Rübsamen; Anja Schultze; Yvonne Kemmling; Nadia Obi; Kathrin Günther; Wolfgang Ahrens; Frank Pessler; Gérard Krause; Rafael T Mikolajczyk
Journal:  Int J Public Health       Date:  2015-09-14       Impact factor: 3.380

Review 8.  Increasing response rates from physicians in oncology research: a structured literature review and data from a recent physician survey.

Authors:  Y Martins; R I Lederman; C L Lowenstein; S Joffe; B A Neville; B T Hastings; G A Abel
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2012-02-28       Impact factor: 7.640

9.  The influence of response mode on study results: offering cigarette smokers a choice of postal or online completion of a survey.

Authors:  Peter W Callas; Laura J Solomon; John R Hughes; Amy E Livingston
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2010-10-21       Impact factor: 5.428

10.  Long Head of Biceps Tendon Management: a Survey of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons.

Authors:  Keith T Corpus; Grant H Garcia; Joseph N Liu; David M Dines; Stephen J O'Brien; Joshua S Dines; Samuel A Taylor
Journal:  HSS J       Date:  2017-10-13
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.