Literature DB >> 12016181

Increasing response rates to postal questionnaires: systematic review.

Phil Edwards1, Ian Roberts, Mike Clarke, Carolyn DiGuiseppi, Sarah Pratap, Reinhard Wentz, Irene Kwan.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To identify methods to increase response to postal questionnaires.
DESIGN: Systematic review of randomised controlled trials of any method to influence response to postal questionnaires. STUDIES REVIEWED: 292 randomised controlled trials including 258 315 participants INTERVENTION REVIEWED: 75 strategies for influencing response to postal questionnaires. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The proportion of completed or partially completed questionnaires returned.
RESULTS: The odds of response were more than doubled when a monetary incentive was used (odds ratio 2.02; 95% confidence interval 1.79 to 2.27) and almost doubled when incentives were not conditional on response (1.71; 1.29 to 2.26). Response was more likely when short questionnaires were used (1.86; 1.55 to 2.24). Personalised questionnaires and letters increased response (1.16; 1.06 to 1.28), as did the use of coloured ink (1.39; 1.16 to 1.67). The odds of response were more than doubled when the questionnaires were sent by recorded delivery (2.21; 1.51 to 3.25) and increased when stamped return envelopes were used (1.26; 1.13 to 1.41) and questionnaires were sent by first class post (1.12; 1.02 to 1.23). Contacting participants before sending questionnaires increased response (1.54; 1.24 to 1.92), as did follow up contact (1.44; 1.22 to 1.70) and providing non-respondents with a second copy of the questionnaire (1.41; 1.02 to 1.94). Questionnaires designed to be of more interest to participants were more likely to be returned (2.44; 1.99 to 3.01), but questionnaires containing questions of a sensitive nature were less likely to be returned (0.92; 0.87 to 0.98). Questionnaires originating from universities were more likely to be returned than were questionnaires from other sources, such as commercial organisations (1.31; 1.11 to 1.54).
CONCLUSIONS: Health researchers using postal questionnaires can improve the quality of their research by using the strategies shown to be effective in this systematic review.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12016181      PMCID: PMC111107          DOI: 10.1136/bmj.324.7347.1183

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ        ISSN: 0959-8138


  5 in total

Review 1.  Heterogeneity and statistical significance in meta-analysis: an empirical study of 125 meta-analyses.

Authors:  E A Engels; C H Schmid; N Terrin; I Olkin; J Lau
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2000-07-15       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Identification of randomized controlled trials in systematic reviews: accuracy and reliability of screening records.

Authors:  Phil Edwards; Mike Clarke; Carolyn DiGuiseppi; Sarah Pratap; Ian Roberts; Reinhard Wentz
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2002-06-15       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test.

Authors:  M Egger; G Davey Smith; M Schneider; C Minder
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1997-09-13

4.  Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials.

Authors:  K F Schulz; I Chalmers; R J Hayes; D G Altman
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1995-02-01       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 5.  Obtaining data from randomised controlled trials: how much do we need for reliable and informative meta-analyses?

Authors:  M J Clarke; L A Stewart
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1994-10-15
  5 in total
  438 in total

1.  Improving the response rates to questionnaires.

Authors:  Liam Smeeth; Astrid E Fletcher
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-05-18

Review 2.  Methods for incorporating patients' views in health care.

Authors:  Michel Wensing; Glyn Elwyn
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-04-19

3.  Recruitment of doctors to non-standard grades in the NHS: analysis of job advertisements and survey of advertisers.

Authors:  Sabina Dosani; Sara Schroter; Rhona MacDonald; Jackie Connor
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-10-25

4.  Increasing response rates to postal questionnaires. Changing layout of questionnaires increases response rates.

Authors:  Cynthia P Iglesias; Yvonne F Birks; David J Torgerson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-08-24

5.  Effects of disseminating research findings on response rates in a community survey: a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  D S Morrison; H Thomson; M Petticrew
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 3.710

6.  Authors' perceptions of electronic publishing: two cross sectional surveys.

Authors:  Sara Schroter; Helen Barratt; Jane Smith
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-05-19

Review 7.  Administering, analysing, and reporting your questionnaire.

Authors:  Petra M Boynton
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-06-05

8.  Provider management of and satisfaction with laboratory testing in the nursing home setting: results of a national internet-based survey.

Authors:  Brian H Shirts; Subashan Perera; Joseph T Hanlon; Yazan F Roumani; Stephanie A Studenski; David A Nace; Michael J Becich; Steven M Handler
Journal:  J Am Med Dir Assoc       Date:  2009-01-08       Impact factor: 4.669

9.  The Effects of a Delayed Incentive on Response Rates, Response Mode, Data Quality, and Sample Bias in a Nationally Representative Mixed Mode Study.

Authors:  Katherine A McGonagle; Vicki A Freedman
Journal:  Field methods       Date:  2016-10-17

10.  Identifying modifiable barriers to medication error reporting in the nursing home setting.

Authors:  Steven M Handler; Subashan Perera; Ellen F Olshansky; Stephanie A Studenski; David A Nace; Douglas B Fridsma; Joseph T Hanlon
Journal:  J Am Med Dir Assoc       Date:  2007-10-22       Impact factor: 4.669

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.