Literature DB >> 21154088

Differences between RDD telephone and ABS mail survey design: coverage, unit nonresponse, and measurement error.

Andy Peytchev1, Jamie Ridenhour, Karol Krotki.   

Abstract

Using list-assisted random digit dialing (RDD) with telephone data collection and address-based sampling (ABS) with mail questionnaires are two survey designs that yield probability based inference, yet they are so different that they can yield entirely different results. The 2007 Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) provides a unique opportunity to evaluate the effect of these different designs on a variety of survey estimates and, even more importantly, the effect on individual sources of survey error. Understanding the difference in error structure between the two designs is important to survey practitioners in order to select the optimum design, and to data users who can anticipate which results may be affected and how. We first compared estimates between the two designs and then estimated the different sources of error. In addition to identified differences in estimates, we found that for some estimates the two designs can yield similar results merely due to the effect of similar biases. The error components were quite different between the two designs--while the ABS design yields almost complete coverage of the population compared to the RDD design, it was subjected to substantially higher nonresponse bias.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21154088     DOI: 10.1080/10810730.2010.525297

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Health Commun        ISSN: 1081-0730


  5 in total

1.  Picking up the pace: changes in method and frame for the health information national trends survey (2011-2014).

Authors:  Lila J Finney Rutten; Terisa Davis; Ellen Burke Beckjord; Kelly Blake; Richard P Moser; Bradford W Hesse
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  2012

2.  Correlates and geographic patterns of knowledge that physical activity decreases cancer risk.

Authors:  A Susana Ramírez; Lila J Finney Rutten; Robin C Vanderpool; Richard P Moser; Bradford W Hesse
Journal:  J Prim Prev       Date:  2013-04

3.  Second-stage non-response in the Swiss health survey: determinants and bias in outcomes.

Authors:  Thomas Volken
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2013-02-23       Impact factor: 3.295

4.  Data Resource Profile: The National Cancer Institute's Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS).

Authors:  Lila J Finney Rutten; Kelly D Blake; Victoria G Skolnick; Terisa Davis; Richard P Moser; Bradford W Hesse
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2020-02-01       Impact factor: 7.196

5.  Missing-data analysis: socio- demographic, clinical and lifestyle determinants of low response rate on self- reported psychological and nutrition related multi- item instruments in the context of the ATTICA epidemiological study.

Authors:  Thomas Tsiampalis; Demosthenes B Panagiotakos
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2020-06-08       Impact factor: 4.615

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.