Literature DB >> 23317709

A quick guide to survey research.

T L Jones1, M A J Baxter, V Khanduja.   

Abstract

Questionnaires are a very useful survey tool that allow large populations to be assessed with relative ease. Despite a widespread perception that surveys are easy to conduct, in order to yield meaningful results, a survey needs extensive planning, time and effort. In this article, we aim to cover the main aspects of designing, implementing and analysing a survey as well as focusing on techniques that would improve response rates.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23317709      PMCID: PMC3964639          DOI: 10.1308/003588413X13511609956372

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl        ISSN: 0035-8843            Impact factor:   1.891


Medical research questionnaires or surveys are vital tools used to gather information on individual perspectives in a large cohort. Within the medical realm, there are three main types of survey: epidemiological surveys, surveys on attitudes to a health service or intervention and questionnaires assessing knowledge on a particular issue or topic. Despite a widespread perception that surveys are easy to conduct, in order to yield meaningful results, a survey needs extensive planning, time and effort. In this article, we aim to cover the main aspects of designing, implementing and analysing a survey as well as focusing on techniques that would improve response rates.

Clear research goal

The first and most important step in designing a survey is to have a clear idea of what you are looking for. It will always be tempting to take a blanket approach and ask as many questions as possible in the hope of getting as much information as possible. This type of approach does not work as asking too many irrelevant or incoherent questions reduces the response rate and therefore reduces the power of the study. This is especially important when surveying physicians as they often have a lower response rate than the rest of the population. Instead, you must carefully consider the important data you will be using and work on a ‘need to know’ rather than a ‘would be nice to know’ model. After considering the question you are trying to answer, deciding whom you are going to ask is the next step. With small populations, attempting to survey them all is manageable but as your population gets bigger, a sample must be taken. The size of this sample is more important than you might expect. After lost questionnaires, non-responders and improper answers are taken into account, this sample must still be big enough to be representative of the entire population. If it is not big enough, the power of your statistics will drop and you may not get any meaningful answers at all. It is for this reason that getting a statistician involved in your study early on is absolutely crucial. Data should not be collected until you know what you are going to do with them.

Directed questions

After settling on your research goal and beginning to design a questionnaire, the main considerations are the method of data collection, the survey instrument and the type of question you are going to ask. Methods of data collection include personal interviews, telephone, postal or electronic (Table 1).
Table 1

Advantages and disadvantages of survey methods

Method of data collectionAdvantagesDisadvantages
Personal• Complex questions• Expensive
 • Visual aids can be used• Time inefficient
 • Higher response rates• Training to avoid bias
Telephone• Allows clarification• No visual aids
 • Larger radius than personal• Difficult to develop rapport
 • Less expensive or time consuming 
 • Higher response rates 
Postal• Larger target• Non-response
 • Visual aids (although limited)• Time for data compilation
 • Lower response rates 
Electronic• Larger target• Non-response
 • Visual aids• Not all subjects accessible
 • Quick response 
 • Quick data compilation 
 • Lower response rates 
Collected data are only useful if they convey information accurately and consistently about the topic in which you are interested. This is where a validated survey instrument comes in to the questionnaire design. Validated instruments are those that have been extensively tested and are correctly calibrated to their target. They can therefore be assumed to be accurate. It may be possible to modify a previously validated instrument but you should seek specialist advice as this is likely to reduce its power. Examples of validated models are the Beck Hopelessness Scale or the Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination. The next step is choosing the type of question you are going to ask. The questionnaire should be designed to answer the question you want answered. Each question should be clear, concise and without bias. Normalising statements should be included and the language level targeted towards those at the lowest educational level in your cohort. You should avoid open, double barrelled questions and those questions that include negative items and assign causality. The questions you use may elicit either an open (free text answer) or closed response. Open responses are more flexible but require more time and effort to analyse, whereas closed responses require more initial input in order to exhaust all possible options but are easier to analyse and present. Advantages and disadvantages of survey methods

Questionnaire

Two more aspects come into questionnaire design: aesthetics and question order. While this is not relevant to telephone or personal questionnaires, in self-administered surveys the aesthetics of the questionnaire are crucial. Having spent a large amount of time fine-tuning your questions, presenting them in such a way as to maximise response rates is pivotal to obtaining good results. Visual elements to think of include smooth, simple and symmetrical shapes, soft colours and repetition of visual elements. Once you have attracted your subject’s attention and willingness with a well designed and attractive survey, the order in which you put your questions is critical. To do this you should focus on what you need to know; start by placing easier, important questions at the beginning, group common themes in the middle and keep questions on demographics to near the end. The questions should be arrayed in a logical order, questions on the same topic close together and with sensible sections if long enough to warrant them. Introductory and summary questions to mark the start and end of the survey are also helpful.

Pilot study

Once a completed survey has been compiled, it needs to be tested. The ideal next step should highlight spelling errors, ambiguous questions and anything else that impairs completion of the questionnaire. A pilot study, in which you apply your work to a small sample of your target population in a controlled setting, may highlight areas in which work still needs to be done. Where possible, being present while the pilot is going on will allow a focus group-type atmosphere in which you can discuss aspects of the survey with those who are going to be filling it in. This step may seem non-essential but detecting previously unconsidered difficulties needs to happen as early as possible and it is important to use your participants’ time wisely as they are unlikely to give it again.

Distribution and collection

While it should be considered quite early on, we will now discuss routes of survey administration and ways to maximise results. Questionnaires can be self-administered electronically or by post, or administered by a researcher by telephone or in person. The advantages and disadvantages of each method are summarised in Table 1. Telephone and personal surveys are very time and resource consuming whereas postal and electronic surveys suffer from low response rates and response bias. Your route should be chosen with care. Methods for maximising response rates for self-administered surveys are listed in Table 2, taken from a Cochrane review.2 The differences between methods of maximising responses to postal or e-surveys are considerable but common elements include keeping the questionnaire short and logical as well as including incentives.
Table 2

Methods for improving response rates in postal and electronic questionnaires

PostalElectronic
Monetary or non-monetary incentivesNon-monetary incentives
Teaser on the envelopePersonalised questionnaires
Pre-notificationInclude pictures
Follow-up with another copy includedNot including ‘survey’ in subject line
Handwritten addressesMale signature
University sponsorshipWhite background
Use recorded deliveryShort questionnaire
Include return envelopeOffer of results
Avoid sensitive questionsStatement that others have responded
Methods for improving response rates in postal and electronic questionnaires Key points Involve a statistician early on. Run a pilot study to uncover problems. Consider using a validated instrument. Only ask what you ‘need to know’. Consider guidelines on improving response rates.

Analysis

The collected data will come in a number of forms depending on the method of collection. Data from telephone or personal interviews can be directly entered into a computer database whereas postal data can be entered at a later stage. Electronic questionnaires can allow responses to go directly into a computer database. Problems arise from errors in data entry and when questionnaires are returned with missing data fields. As mentioned earlier, it is essential to have a statistician involved from the beginning for help with data analysis. He or she will have helped to determine the sample size required to ensure your study has enough power. The statistician can also suggest tests of significance appropriate to your survey, such as Student’s t-test or the chi-square test.

Conclusions

Survey research is a unique way of gathering information from a large cohort. Advantages of surveys include having a large population and therefore a greater statistical power, the ability to gather large amounts of information and having the availability of validated models. However, surveys are costly, there is sometimes discrepancy in recall accuracy and the validity of a survey depends on the response rate. Proper design is vital to enable analysis of results and pilot studies are critical to this process.
  4 in total

Review 1.  An introductory guide to survey research in anaesthesia.

Authors:  D Jones; D Story; O Clavisi; R Jones; P Peyton
Journal:  Anaesth Intensive Care       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 1.669

2.  The measurement of pessimism: the hopelessness scale.

Authors:  A T Beck; A Weissman; D Lester; L Trexler
Journal:  J Consult Clin Psychol       Date:  1974-12

3.  The Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination Revised (ACE-R): a brief cognitive test battery for dementia screening.

Authors:  Eneida Mioshi; Kate Dawson; Joanna Mitchell; Robert Arnold; John R Hodges
Journal:  Int J Geriatr Psychiatry       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 3.485

Review 4.  Methods to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires.

Authors:  Philip James Edwards; Ian Roberts; Mike J Clarke; Carolyn Diguiseppi; Reinhard Wentz; Irene Kwan; Rachel Cooper; Lambert M Felix; Sarah Pratap
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2009-07-08
  4 in total
  48 in total

1.  Combination of stereotactic radiotherapy and targeted therapy: patterns-of-care survey in German-speaking countries.

Authors:  S G C Kroeze; C Fritz; L Basler; E Gkika; T B Brunner; A L Grosu; M Guckenberger
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2019-02-08       Impact factor: 3.621

2.  Impact of Surgical Lighting on Intraoperative Safety in Low-Resource Settings: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Surgical Providers.

Authors:  Jared A Forrester; Nicholas J Boyd; J Edward F Fitzgerald; Iain H Wilson; Abebe Bekele; Thomas G Weiser
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 3.352

3.  Explaining Why Farmers Grow Tobacco: Evidence From Malawi, Kenya, and Zambia.

Authors:  Adriana Appau; Jeffrey Drope; Fastone Goma; Peter Magati; Ronald Labonte; Donald Makoka; Richard Zulu; Qing Li; Raphael Lencucha
Journal:  Nicotine Tob Res       Date:  2020-12-12       Impact factor: 4.244

4.  Assessment of Impostor Phenomenon in Student Pharmacists and Faculty at Two Doctor of Pharmacy Programs.

Authors:  Jaclyn Boyle; Daniel R Malcom; Alex Barker; Ramandeep Gill; Mackenzie Lloyd; Sara Bonenfant
Journal:  Am J Pharm Educ       Date:  2021-05-19       Impact factor: 2.047

5.  What Kind of Surgeon Will You Be? An Analysis of Specialty Interest Changes Over the Course of General Surgery Residency.

Authors:  Katherine Giuliano; Eric Etchill; Sandra DiBrito; Bethany Sacks
Journal:  Med Sci Educ       Date:  2020-10-14

6.  Testicular torsion treatment: the horns of a dilemma?

Authors:  S Lewis; L Hopkins; T Evans; W Lewis; R Harries
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2019-11-22       Impact factor: 1.891

7.  A Consensus-Based Checklist for Reporting of Survey Studies (CROSS).

Authors:  Akash Sharma; Nguyen Tran Minh Duc; Tai Luu Lam Thang; Nguyen Hai Nam; Sze Jia Ng; Kirellos Said Abbas; Nguyen Tien Huy; Ana Marušić; Christine L Paul; Janette Kwok; Juntra Karbwang; Chiara de Waure; Frances J Drummond; Yoshiyuki Kizawa; Erik Taal; Joeri Vermeulen; Gillian H M Lee; Adam Gyedu; Kien Gia To; Martin L Verra; Évelyne M Jacqz-Aigrain; Wouter K G Leclercq; Simo T Salminen; Cathy Donald Sherbourne; Barbara Mintzes; Sergi Lozano; Ulrich S Tran; Mitsuaki Matsui; Mohammad Karamouzian
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2021-04-22       Impact factor: 6.473

8.  Coronavirus Disease 2019 Exposure in Surgeons and Anesthesiologists at a New York City Specialty Hospital: A Cross-Sectional Study of Symptoms and SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Status.

Authors:  Ellen M Soffin; Marie-Jacqueline Reisener; Douglas E Padgett; Bryan T Kelly; Andrew A Sama; Jiaqi Zhu; Stephan N Salzmann; Erika Chiapparelli; Ichiro Okano; Lisa Oezel; Andy O Miller; Frank P Cammisa; Federico P Girardi; Alexander P Hughes
Journal:  J Occup Environ Med       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 2.306

9.  Impact of prediabetes education program on Knowledge, attitude and practice among prediabetic population of south India.

Authors:  K Mohsina Hyder; Jithin Mohan; Visakh Varma; S Ponnusankar; D Raja
Journal:  Prev Med Rep       Date:  2021-05-10

10.  Discrimination in the surgical discipline: an international European evaluation (DISDAIN).

Authors:  M Holzgang; N Koenemann; H Skinner; J Burke; A Smith; A Young
Journal:  BJS Open       Date:  2021-05-07
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.