Literature DB >> 14507804

Third mailings in epidemiological studies: are they really necessary?

Alison M Elliott1, Philip C Hannaford.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Whether or not third mailings are appropriate or worthwhile in postal epidemiological studies has not been thoroughly investigated and requires examination.
METHODS: A self-completion postal questionnaire of 2184 individuals was conducted in 2000. The socio-demographic and health characteristics of four groups of individuals (first mailing respondents, second mailing respondents, third mailing respondents and non-respondents) were compared.
RESULTS: Some significant differences between the groups were found, however, the inclusion of respondents to the third mailing did not significantly change the overall characteristics of respondents compared to non-respondents. DISCUSSION: When differences do exist between respondents and non-respondents, our results suggest that a third mailing is unlikely to remove many of these differences. The study supports our previous suggestion that the effort and resources expended in carrying out a third mailing may not be justified.

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14507804     DOI: 10.1093/fampra/cmg517

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Fam Pract        ISSN: 0263-2136            Impact factor:   2.267


  2 in total

1.  Drugs to support smoking cessation in UK general practice: are evidence based guidelines being followed?

Authors:  A Wilson; P Sinfield; S Rodgers; V Hammersley; T Coleman
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2006-08

2.  Feasibility of Monitoring Health and Well-being in Emerging Adults: Pilot Longitudinal Cohort Study.

Authors:  Reidar P Lystad; Diana Fajardo Pulido; Lorna Peters; Melissa Johnstone; Louise A Ellis; Jeffrey Braithwaite; Viviana Wuthrich; Janaki Amin; Cate M Cameron; Rebecca J Mitchell
Journal:  JMIR Form Res       Date:  2022-01-06
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.