Literature DB >> 23183824

An appraisal of the utility or futility of ENT consultant postal questionnaires.

Stephen Ryan1, J Saunders, E Clarke, J E Fenton.   

Abstract

Despite an increase in ENT postal questionnaires, the quality of their methodology has been questioned (Ramphul et al. in J Laryngol Otol 119:175-178, 1). This retrospective study examined whether quality and utility of such questionnaires published since 2005 has improved. Seventeen consultant postal questionnaires published between 2005 and 2012 were reviewed. Quality of questionnaires was assessed using a 30-point score based on compliance with 15 criteria previously established to evaluate postal questionnaire study-design (Ramphul et al. in J Laryngol Otol 119:175-178, 1). Citation rates were used as an indicator of utility. The specific comments made in each citing paper was reviewed providing information on whether questionnaire findings (a) had an impact on clinical practice, (b) were the citing comments positive, (c) negative or (d) non-specific. Recurrent methodological flaws were identified in all questionnaires. The average score assigned was 44 %, versus 32 % previously reported (Ramphul et al. in J Laryngol Otol 119:175-178, 1) (P < 0.01, Student's t test). The low citation rate demonstrates poor utility for postal questionnaires. Citations were general non-specific referencing with no clear indication that questionnaire findings positively impacted clinical practice. In conclusion, although the quality of ENT postal questionnaire has improved since the original study (Ramphul et al. in J Laryngol Otol 119:175-178, 1), important recurring methodological flaws still exist. The poor utility, based on low citation rates, also reflects the continued deficiencies in design quality. It is recommended that authors of questionnaire-based research should ensure that guidelines for questionnaire design are adhered in order to improve the validity of findings and hence impact on clinical practice.

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23183824     DOI: 10.1007/s00405-012-2257-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol        ISSN: 0937-4477            Impact factor:   2.503


  27 in total

1.  Do citation classics in rhinology reflect utility rather than quality?

Authors:  J E Fenton; A O'Connor; I Ullah; I Ahmed; M Shaikh
Journal:  Rhinology       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 3.681

2.  Ossiculoplasty: a UK survey.

Authors:  G Dhanasekar; H K Khan; N Malik; F Wilson; V V Raut
Journal:  J Laryngol Otol       Date:  2006-07-19       Impact factor: 1.469

3.  A survey of postoperative nasal packing among UK ENT surgeons.

Authors:  Costa Repanos; Stephen E McDonald; Amir H Sadr
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2009-04-17       Impact factor: 2.503

4.  Adenoidectomy techniques: UK survey.

Authors:  G Dhanasekar; A Liapi; N Turner
Journal:  J Laryngol Otol       Date:  2009-11-30       Impact factor: 1.469

5.  Citation frequency and journal impact: valid indicators of scientific quality?

Authors:  P O Seglen
Journal:  J Intern Med       Date:  1991-02       Impact factor: 8.989

6.  A national survey amongst UK otolaryngologists regarding the treatment of Ménière's disease.

Authors:  W K Smith; V Sankar; A G Pfleiderer
Journal:  J Laryngol Otol       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 1.469

7.  Steroids in rhinoplasty: a survey of current UK otolaryngologists' practice.

Authors:  E Ofo; A Singh; J Marais
Journal:  J Laryngol Otol       Date:  2005-11-25       Impact factor: 1.469

8.  Vestibular schwannoma management: current practice amongst UK otolaryngologists--time for a national prospective audit.

Authors:  Shakeel R Saeed; Ranga Suryanarayanan; Attila Dezso; Richard T Ramsden
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 1.891

9.  Paediatric otolaryngology services in the UK: a postal questionnaire survey of ENT consultants.

Authors:  E Z Osman; M K Aneeshkumar; R W Clarke
Journal:  J Laryngol Otol       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 1.469

10.  A review of the current management of impacted foreign bodies in the oesophagus in adults.

Authors:  Senthil K Balasubramaniam; Dominic Bray; Myles I Black; N Y Salama; David B Mitchell
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2008-01-15       Impact factor: 2.503

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.