Literature DB >> 15100615

Assessment of nonresponse bias in an internet survey of alcohol use.

Kypros Kypri1, Shaun Stephenson, John Langley.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Decreasing survey response rates are a growing concern in epidemiological research, principally because prevalence estimates may be biased by selective nonresponse. Internet-based methods have the potential to yield higher-quality data with lower nonresponse rates and at a lower cost than traditional methods. Little research exists on nonresponse bias in Internet surveys of alcohol use. This investigation draws on a study of the implementation of an Internet-based alcohol survey involving a random sample of 1910 university students with a response rate of 82% (n = 1564). Our aim was to identify nonresponse bias and to quantify its effects on estimates of alcohol consumption, the incidence of alcohol-related problems, and the prevalence of hazardous drinking.
METHODS: Survey nonresponse has been characterized in terms of a continuum of resistance model, in which the propensity of individuals to respond is inferred from the level of effort required to elicit a response. Two methods were used to test this model: comparison of the demographic characteristics of the target sample with those of the respondents and comparison of alcohol variables for those who responded late with those who responded early.
RESULTS: The results attained with method 1 showed that bias varied as a function of gender, age, ethnicity, and living arrangement. The results attained with method 2 showed that the incidence of alcohol-related problems and hazardous drinking prevalence varied as a function of response latency. If only the early and intermediate respondents had participated, the incidence of alcohol-related problems and the prevalence of hazardous drinking would each have been underestimated by 3%.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings reported here are consistent with the continuum of resistance model but show that the bias resulting from nonresponse is arguably too small to be of concern with respect to estimating consumption levels, the incidence of alcohol-related problems, and the prevalence of hazardous drinking.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15100615     DOI: 10.1097/01.alc.0000121654.99277.26

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Alcohol Clin Exp Res        ISSN: 0145-6008            Impact factor:   3.455


  29 in total

1.  Reasons for nonresponse in a web-based survey of alcohol involvement among first-year college students.

Authors:  James A Cranford; Sean Esteban McCabe; Carol J Boyd; Janie Slayden; Mark B Reed; Julie M Ketchie; James E Lange; Marcia S Scott
Journal:  Addict Behav       Date:  2007-08-03       Impact factor: 3.913

2.  Shoot shovel and sanction yourself: Self-policing as a response to wolf poaching among Swedish hunters.

Authors:  M Nils Peterson; Erica von Essen; Hans Peter Hansen; Tarla Rai Peterson
Journal:  Ambio       Date:  2018-06-28       Impact factor: 5.129

3.  Nonresponse bias in survey estimates of alcohol consumption and its association with harm.

Authors:  Deborah A Dawson; Risë B Goldstein; Roger P Pickering; Bridget F Grant
Journal:  J Stud Alcohol Drugs       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 2.582

4.  Reliability and validity of self-reported smoking in an anonymous online survey with young adults.

Authors:  Danielle E Ramo; Sharon M Hall; Judith J Prochaska
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  2011-05-16       Impact factor: 4.267

Review 5.  Face-to-face versus computer-delivered alcohol interventions for college drinkers: a meta-analytic review, 1998 to 2010.

Authors:  Kate B Carey; Lori A J Scott-Sheldon; Jennifer C Elliott; Lorra Garey; Michael P Carey
Journal:  Clin Psychol Rev       Date:  2012-09-01

6.  Brief motivational feedback and cognitive behavioral interventions for prevention of disordered gambling: a randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Mary E Larimer; Clayton Neighbors; Ty W Lostutter; Ursula Whiteside; Jessica M Cronce; Debra Kaysen; Denise D Walker
Journal:  Addiction       Date:  2012-02-28       Impact factor: 6.526

7.  Internet communities for recruitment of cancer patients into an Internet survey: a discussion paper.

Authors:  Eun-Ok Im; Wonshik Chee; Hsiu-Min Tsai; Melinda Bender; Hyun Ju Lim
Journal:  Int J Nurs Stud       Date:  2006-09-07       Impact factor: 5.837

8.  The impact of school nonresponse on substance use prevalence estimates - Germany as a case study.

Authors:  Johannes Thrul; Alexander Pabst; Ludwig Kraus
Journal:  Int J Drug Policy       Date:  2015-06-30

9.  Personalized mailed feedback for college drinking prevention: a randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Mary E Larimer; Christine M Lee; Jason R Kilmer; Patricia M Fabiano; Christopher B Stark; Irene M Geisner; Kimberly A Mallett; Ty W Lostutter; Jessica M Cronce; Maggie Feeney; Clayton Neighbors
Journal:  J Consult Clin Psychol       Date:  2007-04

10.  Undergraduate student drinking and related harms at an Australian university: web-based survey of a large random sample.

Authors:  Jonathan Hallett; Peter M Howat; Bruce R Maycock; Alexandra McManus; Kypros Kypri; Satvinder S Dhaliwal
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2012-01-16       Impact factor: 3.295

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.