OBJECTIVE: This study examines the effects of telephone and mail interview methods on the measurement of health-related quality of life. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING:One thousand six hundred ninety individuals aged 25-66 were interviewed randomly either by telephone or by mail. Health-related quality of life was assessed with the German SF-8. RESULTS: Although respondents in the telephone survey were more willing to participate (77.4% vs. 47.5%) the difference in the accessibility of publicly available address and telephone records meant that overall more people were interviewed by mail than by telephone (53.2% vs. 46.8%). No differences occurred in terms of the sociodemographic makeup. Telephone respondents gave a more positive account of the mental dimension of their health-related quality of life; whereas mail interviews led to a better rating of the respondents' physical well-being. Gender-specific analyses indicate a slight discrepancy in the influence of the method of interviewing on men and women. Further differences were identified concerning the variance in the existence of ceiling and floor effects and the correlation between items. CONCLUSION: Found differences are small but at least to be valued as relevant in certain settings. Therefore, we approve the use and development of factors of amendment.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: This study examines the effects of telephone and mail interview methods on the measurement of health-related quality of life. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: One thousand six hundred ninety individuals aged 25-66 were interviewed randomly either by telephone or by mail. Health-related quality of life was assessed with the German SF-8. RESULTS: Although respondents in the telephone survey were more willing to participate (77.4% vs. 47.5%) the difference in the accessibility of publicly available address and telephone records meant that overall more people were interviewed by mail than by telephone (53.2% vs. 46.8%). No differences occurred in terms of the sociodemographic makeup. Telephone respondents gave a more positive account of the mental dimension of their health-related quality of life; whereas mail interviews led to a better rating of the respondents' physical well-being. Gender-specific analyses indicate a slight discrepancy in the influence of the method of interviewing on men and women. Further differences were identified concerning the variance in the existence of ceiling and floor effects and the correlation between items. CONCLUSION: Found differences are small but at least to be valued as relevant in certain settings. Therefore, we approve the use and development of factors of amendment.
Authors: Nicolas Couët; Michel Labrecque; Hubert Robitaille; Stéphane Turcotte; France Légaré Journal: Health Expect Date: 2014-07-07 Impact factor: 3.377
Authors: Malin Ander; Helena Grönqvist; Martin Cernvall; Gunn Engvall; Mariann Hedström; Gustaf Ljungman; Johan Lyhagen; Elisabet Mattsson; Louise von Essen Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2015-09-10 Impact factor: 3.894