BACKGROUND: There is a general consensus that postal surveys of physicians have low response rates. Recent systematic reviews have provided an improved evidence base to help researchers maximize response rates to self-completion questionnaires but to date, there is no comprehensive analysis of whether response rates have improved. OBJECTIVE: To determine a contemporary estimate for the mean response rate to surveys of GPs published in primary care journals over the past decade. METHOD: Twenty-four primary care journals from January 2000 to summer 2009 were searched for postal surveys of GPs. A total of 2838 abstracts were screened, with 683 full-text articles being examined for eligibility and 355 citations included. RESULTS: Three hundred and sixty-one surveys of GPs were identified. A total of 338 598 questionnaires were distributed during the study period, with 182 256 returned response rate 61% (95% confidence interval [CI] 59-63%). There was some evidence of an association between response rate and journal impact factor, with a statistically significant higher mean response rate for journals in the highest (mean 67%; 95% CI 64-70%) compared to journals in the lowest quartile of impact factor (mean 55%; 95% CI 51-59%). There was no evidence that mean response rate had increased in the period from 2000 to 2009. CONCLUSIONS: Postal questionnaires of GPs do not necessarily result in a low response rate. Response rates over the past decade appear relatively unchanged despite the greater evidence base for improving response and further work should explore reasons for this.
BACKGROUND: There is a general consensus that postal surveys of physicians have low response rates. Recent systematic reviews have provided an improved evidence base to help researchers maximize response rates to self-completion questionnaires but to date, there is no comprehensive analysis of whether response rates have improved. OBJECTIVE: To determine a contemporary estimate for the mean response rate to surveys of GPs published in primary care journals over the past decade. METHOD: Twenty-four primary care journals from January 2000 to summer 2009 were searched for postal surveys of GPs. A total of 2838 abstracts were screened, with 683 full-text articles being examined for eligibility and 355 citations included. RESULTS: Three hundred and sixty-one surveys of GPs were identified. A total of 338 598 questionnaires were distributed during the study period, with 182 256 returned response rate 61% (95% confidence interval [CI] 59-63%). There was some evidence of an association between response rate and journal impact factor, with a statistically significant higher mean response rate for journals in the highest (mean 67%; 95% CI 64-70%) compared to journals in the lowest quartile of impact factor (mean 55%; 95% CI 51-59%). There was no evidence that mean response rate had increased in the period from 2000 to 2009. CONCLUSIONS: Postal questionnaires of GPs do not necessarily result in a low response rate. Response rates over the past decade appear relatively unchanged despite the greater evidence base for improving response and further work should explore reasons for this.
Authors: Jimmy T Le; Susan Hutfless; Tianjing Li; Neil M Bressler; James Heyward; Ava K Bittner; Adam Glassman; Kay Dickersin Journal: Ophthalmol Retina Date: 2017 Mar-Apr
Authors: Jürgen Rehm; Allaman Allamani; Roberto Della Vedova; Zsuzsanna Elekes; Andrzej Jakubczyk; Inga Landsmane; Jakob Manthey; José Moreno-España; Lars Pieper; Charlotte Probst; Sigita Snikere; Pierluigi Struzzo; Fabio Voller; Hans-Ulrich Wittchen; Antoni Gual; Marcin Wojnar Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2015 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Antonieta Medina-Lara; Bogdan Grigore; Ruth Lewis; Jaime Peters; Sarah Price; Paolo Landa; Sophie Robinson; Richard Neal; William Hamilton; Anne E Spencer Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2020-11 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Sara Muller; Gwenllian Wynne-Jones; Rebecca Daniel; Samuel T Creavin; Annette Bishop; Christian D Mallen Journal: Eur J Gen Pract Date: 2012-06-18 Impact factor: 1.904
Authors: Elisa J F Houwink; Arno M M Muijtjens; Sarah R van Teeffelen; Lidewij Henneman; Jan Joost Rethans; Florijn Jacobi; Liesbeth van der Jagt; Irina Stirbu; Scheltus J van Luijk; Connie T R M Stumpel; Hanne E Meijers-Heijboer; Cees van der Vleuten; Martina C Cornel; Geert Jan Dinant Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-04-02 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Elisa J F Houwink; Sarah R van Teeffelen; Arno M M Muijtjens; Lidewij Henneman; Florijn Jacobi; Scheltus J van Luijk; Geert Jan Dinant; Cees van der Vleuten; Martina C Cornel Journal: Eur J Hum Genet Date: 2013-08-14 Impact factor: 4.246