OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review examining whether minority ethnic populations participate in surveys as actively as the majority ethnic population. METHODS: A literature and grey literature search was conducted using five online databases as well as government databases and reports, including the search terms: survey response rates or non-response rates and racial or ethnic populations (White, African American, Asian, and Hispanic); survey modes or methods (mail, telephone, face to face, e-mail); and response bias (non-response bias, response bias or social desirability). The search was limited to English language and articles published from January 1990 to June 2009. Article exclusions were based on further inclusion and exclusion criteria. SYNTHESIS: Thirty-five articles were identified on ethnicities and response rates to survey modes. Six articles compared survey mode and response rate for multiple ethnic populations. Response rates ranged from 22.0% to 68.8% in Whites, and in other ethnic groups ranged from 15.4% in African Americans to 70.9% in Latino Americans. Among the 29 articles that presented survey mode and response rate for a specific ethnicity, the highest response rate reported was from African Americans (92.5%) and the lowest was from Cambodian Americans (30.3%). CONCLUSION: Response rate varied across studies but was similar across ethnicities. Response rate may be related to many factors, including survey mode, length of questionnaire, survey language and cultural sensitivity to content. Our review indicates that ethnic populations who participate in surveys are as likely to participate in research as Whites. In literature, data validity across ethnicity is still unknown and should be studied in the future.
OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review examining whether minority ethnic populations participate in surveys as actively as the majority ethnic population. METHODS: A literature and grey literature search was conducted using five online databases as well as government databases and reports, including the search terms: survey response rates or non-response rates and racial or ethnic populations (White, African American, Asian, and Hispanic); survey modes or methods (mail, telephone, face to face, e-mail); and response bias (non-response bias, response bias or social desirability). The search was limited to English language and articles published from January 1990 to June 2009. Article exclusions were based on further inclusion and exclusion criteria. SYNTHESIS: Thirty-five articles were identified on ethnicities and response rates to survey modes. Six articles compared survey mode and response rate for multiple ethnic populations. Response rates ranged from 22.0% to 68.8% in Whites, and in other ethnic groups ranged from 15.4% in African Americans to 70.9% in Latino Americans. Among the 29 articles that presented survey mode and response rate for a specific ethnicity, the highest response rate reported was from African Americans (92.5%) and the lowest was from Cambodian Americans (30.3%). CONCLUSION: Response rate varied across studies but was similar across ethnicities. Response rate may be related to many factors, including survey mode, length of questionnaire, survey language and cultural sensitivity to content. Our review indicates that ethnic populations who participate in surveys are as likely to participate in research as Whites. In literature, data validity across ethnicity is still unknown and should be studied in the future.
Authors: Hude Quan; William A Ghali; Stafford Dean; Colleen Norris; P Diane Galbraith; Peter Faris; Michelle M Graham; Merril L Knudtson Journal: Can J Public Health Date: 2004 Jul-Aug
Authors: Allen M Fremont; Arlene Bierman; Steve L Wickstrom; Chloe E Bird; Mona Shah; José J Escarce; Thomas Horstman; Thomas Rector Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2005 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Dennis R Trinidad; Elizabeth A Gilpin; Karen Messer; Martha M White; John P Pierce Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2006-08-02 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Victoria M Taylor; Yutaka Yasui; Nancy Burke; John H Choe; Elizabeth Acorda; J Carey Jackson Journal: Ethn Dis Date: 2005 Impact factor: 1.847
Authors: Amy D Waterman; Teri Browne; Brian M Waterman; Elisa H Gladstone; Thomas Hostetter Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2008-03-06 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Emmanuel Ngwakongnwi; Brenda R Hemmelgarn; Richard Musto; Kathryn M King-Shier; Hude Quan Journal: Can Fam Physician Date: 2012-12 Impact factor: 3.275
Authors: Eric J Chow; Lena E Winestone; Philip J Lupo; Lisa R Diller; Tara O Henderson; Nina S Kadan-Lottick; Jennifer M Levine; Kirsten K Ness; Smita Bhatia; Saro H Armenian Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2022-09-02 Impact factor: 4.090
Authors: Smita Bhatia; Todd M Gibson; Kirsten K Ness; Qi Liu; Kevin C Oeffinger; Kevin R Krull; Paul C Nathan; Joseph P Neglia; Wendy Leisenring; Yutaka Yasui; Leslie L Robison; Gregory T Armstrong Journal: Cancer Date: 2016-06-02 Impact factor: 6.860