Literature DB >> 30656646

The effect of administration mode on CAHPS survey response rates and results: A comparison of mail and web-based approaches.

Floyd J Fowler1, Carol Cosenza1, Lauren A Cripps2, Susan Edgman-Levitan3, Paul D Cleary4.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare response rates, respondents' characteristics, and substantive results for CAHPS surveys administered using web and mail protocols. DATA SOURCES: Patients who had one or more primary care visits in the preceding 6 months. STUDY DESIGN/DATA COLLECTION
METHODS: Patients for whom primary care practices had email addresses were randomized to one of four survey administration protocols: web via a portal invitation; web via an email invitation; combination of web and mail; and mail only. Another sample of patients without known email addresses was surveyed by mail. Samples of nonrespondents to the Internet and mail protocols were surveyed by telephone. PRINCIPAL
FINDINGS: Response rates to surveys administered using the Internet protocols were lower than for the surveys administered by mail (20 percent vs over 40 percent). However, characteristics of respondents and survey answers were very similar across protocols. Respondents without email addresses were older, less educated, and more likely to be male than those with email addresses, and there were a few differences in their responses. There was little evidence of nonresponse bias in either the mail or web protocols.
CONCLUSION: In this well-educated patient population, web protocols had lower response rates, but substantive results very similar to those from mail protocols. © Health Research and Educational Trust.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CAHPS; internet surveys; mode of data collection; nonresponse bias

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30656646      PMCID: PMC6505419          DOI: 10.1111/1475-6773.13109

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Serv Res        ISSN: 0017-9124            Impact factor:   3.402


  7 in total

1.  Alternative modes for health surveillance surveys: an experiment with web, mail, and telephone.

Authors:  Michael W Link; Ali H Mokdad
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 4.822

2.  Evaluating patients' experiences with individual physicians: a randomized trial of mail, internet, and interactive voice response telephone administration of surveys.

Authors:  Hector P Rodriguez; Ted von Glahn; William H Rogers; Hong Chang; Gary Fanjiang; Dana Gelb Safran
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 2.983

3.  The effect of administration mode on CAHPS survey response rates and results: A comparison of mail and web-based approaches.

Authors:  Floyd J Fowler; Carol Cosenza; Lauren A Cripps; Susan Edgman-Levitan; Paul D Cleary
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2019-01-18       Impact factor: 3.402

4.  Development of and field test results for the CAHPS PCMH Survey.

Authors:  Sarah Hudson Scholle; Oanh Vuong; Lin Ding; Stephanie Fry; Patricia Gallagher; Julie A Brown; Ron D Hays; Paul D Cleary
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 2.983

5.  Evolving Concepts of Patient-Centered Care and the Assessment of Patient Care Experiences: Optimism and Opposition.

Authors:  Paul D Cleary
Journal:  J Health Polit Policy Law       Date:  2016-04-28       Impact factor: 2.265

6.  Effects of survey mode, patient mix, and nonresponse on CAHPS hospital survey scores.

Authors:  Marc N Elliott; Alan M Zaslavsky; Elizabeth Goldstein; William Lehrman; Katrin Hambarsoomians; Megan K Beckett; Laura Giordano
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 3.402

7.  Comparing Web-based with Mail Survey Administration of the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS®) Clinician and Group Survey.

Authors:  Steven C Bergeson; Janiece Gray; Lynn A Ehrmantraut; Tracy Laibson; Ron D Hays
Journal:  Prim Health Care       Date:  2013-04-15
  7 in total
  11 in total

1.  Performance Measures Based on How Adults With Cancer Feel and Function: Stakeholder Recommendations and Feasibility Testing in Six Cancer Centers.

Authors:  Angela M Stover; Benjamin Y Urick; Allison M Deal; Randall Teal; Maihan B Vu; Jessica Carda-Auten; Jennifer Jansen; Arlene E Chung; Antonia V Bennett; Anne Chiang; Charles Cleeland; Yehuda Deutsch; Edmund Tai; Dylan Zylla; Loretta A Williams; Collette Pitzen; Claire Snyder; Bryce Reeve; Tenbroeck Smith; Kristen McNiff; David Cella; Michael N Neuss; Robert Miller; Thomas M Atkinson; Patricia A Spears; Mary Lou Smith; Cindy Geoghegan; Ethan M Basch
Journal:  JCO Oncol Pract       Date:  2020-02-19

2.  The effect of administration mode on CAHPS survey response rates and results: A comparison of mail and web-based approaches.

Authors:  Floyd J Fowler; Carol Cosenza; Lauren A Cripps; Susan Edgman-Levitan; Paul D Cleary
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2019-01-18       Impact factor: 3.402

3.  Needs Assessment to Enhance Knowledge of People in Puerto Rico Living with Alopecia Areata.

Authors:  Rafael J Rivera-Ortiz; Edna Acosta-Pérez; Frances S Nieves-Casasnovas; Franchesca N Sánchez-Quintana
Journal:  P R Health Sci J       Date:  2021-09       Impact factor: 0.600

4.  Evaluation of Problem-Based Learning implementation in a College of Medicine, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: a cross sectional comparative study.

Authors:  Manahel A Almulhem; Jwaher A Almulhem
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2022-04-23       Impact factor: 3.263

5.  The feasibility of web surveys for obtaining patient-reported outcomes from cancer survivors: a randomized experiment comparing survey modes and brochure enclosures.

Authors:  Morgan M Millar; Joanne W Elena; Lisa Gallicchio; Sandra L Edwards; Marjorie E Carter; Kimberly A Herget; Carol Sweeney
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2019-11-15       Impact factor: 4.615

6.  Utilizing SEER Cancer Registries for Population-Based Cancer Survivor Epidemiologic Studies: A Feasibility Study.

Authors:  Lisa Gallicchio; Joanne W Elena; Sarah Fagan; Marjorie Carter; Ann S Hamilton; Theresa A Hastert; Lisa L Hunter; Jie Li; Charles F Lynch; Joel Milam; Morgan M Millar; Denise Modjeski; Lisa E Paddock; Amanda R Reed; Lisa B Moses; Antoinette M Stroup; Carol Sweeney; Edward J Trapido; Michele M West; Xiao-Cheng Wu; Kathy J Helzlsouer
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2020-07-10       Impact factor: 4.254

7.  Comparing Web and Mail Protocols for Administering Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Surveys.

Authors:  Floyd J Fowler; Philip S Brenner; J Lee Hargraves; Paul D Cleary
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2021-10-01       Impact factor: 3.178

8.  Self-reported data in environmental health studies: mail vs. web-based surveys.

Authors:  Manuella Lech Cantuaria; Victoria Blanes-Vidal
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2019-12-12       Impact factor: 4.615

9.  Patient-reported experiences with general practitioners: a randomised study of mail and web-based approaches following a national survey.

Authors:  Hilde Hestad Iversen; Olaf Holmboe; Oyvind Bjertnaes
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-10-13       Impact factor: 2.692

10.  Barriers and Facilitators to the International Implementation of Standardized Outcome Measures in Clinical Cleft Practice.

Authors:  Inge Apon; Carolyn R Rogers-Vizena; Maarten J Koudstaal; Alexander C Allori; Petra Peterson; Sarah L Versnel; Jessily P Ramirez
Journal:  Cleft Palate Craniofac J       Date:  2021-03-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.