Literature DB >> 19154197

Addressing nonresponse bias in postal surveys.

Shannon E MacDonald1, Christine V Newburn-Cook, Donald Schopflocher, Solina Richter.   

Abstract

Postal surveys are sometimes thought of as a simple option for collecting data in community-based studies; however, nurse researchers must exercise care in appropriately addressing the issue of nonresponse. In particular, both the reporters and the users of such research should look beyond survey response rates when considering nonresponse bias. This article describes the benefits of using postal surveys in public health nursing research, while noting the various potential sources of survey error. Particular attention is directed to the implications of low survey response rates, including decreased power, increased standard error, and nonresponse bias. The belief that increasing response rates will necessarily reduce nonresponse bias is discussed, with an emphasis on the need to identify the reasons for nonresponse and to be judicious in the use of strategies to reduce nonresponse bias. Common response-enhancement strategies are identified, while noting the potential for these strategies to increase nonresponse bias. Assessment of the presence and magnitude of nonresponse bias is discussed, and techniques for postsurvey data adjustment are noted. The need to consider nonresponse bias in designing all phases of the study is highlighted, and is exemplified with a case study.

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19154197     DOI: 10.1111/j.1525-1446.2008.00758.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Public Health Nurs        ISSN: 0737-1209            Impact factor:   1.462


  11 in total

1.  Psychotropic medication claims among religious clergy.

Authors:  Steven M Frenk; Sarah A Mustillo; Steven L Foy; Whitney D Arroyave; Elizabeth G Hooten; Kari H Lauderback; Keith G Meador
Journal:  Psychiatr Q       Date:  2013-03

2.  Improving awareness, accountability, and access through health coaching: qualitative study of patients' perspectives.

Authors:  Clare Liddy; Sharon Johnston; Hannah Irving; Kate Nash; Natalie Ward
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 3.275

3.  Association between variables used in the field substitution and post-stratification adjustment in the Belgian health interview survey and non-response.

Authors:  Johan Van der Heyden; Stefaan Demarest; Koen Van Herck; Dirk De Bacquer; Jean Tafforeau; Herman Van Oyen
Journal:  Int J Public Health       Date:  2013-04-26       Impact factor: 3.380

4.  Describing the Mental Health State of Nurses in British Columbia: A Province-Wide Survey Study.

Authors:  Farinaz Havaei; Andy Ma; Michael Leiter; Adriane Gear
Journal:  Healthc Policy       Date:  2021-05

5.  Who does not participate in a follow-up postal study? a survey of infertile couples treated by in vitro fertilization.

Authors:  Penelope Troude; Estelle Bailly; Juliette Guibert; Jean Bouyer; Elise de La Rochebrochard
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2012-07-23       Impact factor: 4.615

6.  Nonresponse error in mail surveys: top ten problems.

Authors:  Jeanette M Daly; Julie K Jones; Patricia L Gereau; Barcey T Levy
Journal:  Nurs Res Pract       Date:  2011-05-05

7.  Evaluation of health care providers' role transition and satisfaction in hospital-at-home for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations: a survey study.

Authors:  Cecile M A Utens; Lucas M A Goossens; Onno C P van Schayck; Maureen P H M Rutten-Vanmölken; Maria W Braken; Loes M G A van Eijsden; Frank W J M Smeenk
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2013-09-27       Impact factor: 2.655

8.  Survey nonresponse among informal caregivers: effects on the presence and magnitude of associations with caregiver burden and satisfaction.

Authors:  Marloes Oldenkamp; Rafael P M Wittek; Mariët Hagedoorn; Ronald P Stolk; Nynke Smidt
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2016-06-08       Impact factor: 3.295

9.  Women's perspectives on human papillomavirus self-sampling in the context of the UK cervical screening programme.

Authors:  Denitza Williams; Myfanwy Davies; Alison Fiander; Daniel Farewell; Sharon Hillier; Kate Brain
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2017-02-10       Impact factor: 3.377

10.  Factors Associated with Participation, Active Refusals and Reasons for Not Taking Part in a Mortality Followback Survey Evaluating End-of-Life Care.

Authors:  Natalia Calanzani; Irene J Higginson; Jonathan Koffman; Barbara Gomes
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-01-08       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.