Literature DB >> 12026750

An example of maximizing survey return rates. Methodological issues for health professionals.

Cheryl Gore-Felton1, Cheryl Koopman, Edwin Bridges, Carl Thoresen, David Spiegel.   

Abstract

Obtaining a high response rate in survey research can bolster statistical power, reduce sampling error, and enhance the generalizability of the results to the population surveyed. We describe a mail survey designed to achieve a high return rate of completed questionnaires from members of the American Psychological Association who were engaged in clinical practice. We adapted the Total Design Method for survey research and were able to achieve a high response rate (68%) among health professionals. This was not an experiment in which we assessed the best method to increase survey response rates, hence we cannot empirically evaluate how each of the steps influenced our overall response rate. Future research is needed to identify the relative effectiveness of each of these principles in enhancing survey response rates. Research is also needed to distinguish general principles that apply across populations from those that must be tailored to specific subpopulations.

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12026750     DOI: 10.1177/01678702025002002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eval Health Prof        ISSN: 0163-2787            Impact factor:   2.651


  11 in total

1.  Trauma, dissociation, and antiretroviral adherence among persons living with HIV/AIDS.

Authors:  Alex S Keuroghlian; Charles S Kamen; Eric Neri; Susanne Lee; Rhianon Liu; Cheryl Gore-Felton
Journal:  J Psychiatr Res       Date:  2011-06-01       Impact factor: 4.791

2.  Characteristics of professionally-led and peer-led cancer support groups in the United Kingdom.

Authors:  Clare Stevinson; Anne Lydon; Ziv Amir
Journal:  J Cancer Surviv       Date:  2010-05-25       Impact factor: 4.442

3.  Surveying multiple health professional team members within institutional settings: an example from the nursing home industry.

Authors:  Melissa A Clark; Anthony Roman; Michelle L Rogers; Denise A Tyler; Vincent Mor
Journal:  Eval Health Prof       Date:  2014-02-04       Impact factor: 2.651

4.  Cancer support group participation in the United Kingdom: a national survey.

Authors:  Clare Stevinson; Anne Lydon; Ziv Amir
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2010-04-28       Impact factor: 3.603

Review 5.  Conducting high-quality research in cardiothoracic surgical education: Recommendations from the Thoracic Education Cooperative Group.

Authors:  Mara B Antonoff; Stephanie Nguyen; Tom C Nguyen; David D Odell
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2018-10-19       Impact factor: 5.209

6.  National survey of antimetabolite use in glaucoma surgery in the United Kingdom.

Authors:  D Siriwardena; B Edmunds; R P L Wormald; P T Khaw
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 4.638

7.  Do noncontingent incentives increase survey response rates among mental health providers? A randomized trial comparison.

Authors:  Kristin M Hawley; Jonathan R Cook; Amanda Jensen-Doss
Journal:  Adm Policy Ment Health       Date:  2009-05-07

8.  Anticoagulation therapy in glaucoma surgery.

Authors:  A Alwitry; A J King; S A Vernon
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2008-04-08       Impact factor: 3.117

9.  Evaluation of the Total Design Method in a survey of Japanese dentists.

Authors:  Yukie Nakai; Peter Milgrom; Toshiko Yoshida; Chikako Ishihara; Tsutomu Shimono
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2005-08-23       Impact factor: 4.615

10.  Infant male circumcision: healthcare provider knowledge and associated factors.

Authors:  Erin J Starzyk; Michele A Kelley; Rachel N Caskey; Alan Schwartz; Joan F Kennelly; Robert C Bailey
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-01-30       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.