Literature DB >> 32068102

Conclusions from surveys may not consider important biases: a systematic survey of surveys.

Nancy Santesso1, Angela M Barbara2, Rakhshan Kamran2, Sita Akkinepally3, John Cairney4, Elie A Akl5, Holger J Schünemann2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Surveys can inform important health care questions. However, should decision-makers believe strong conclusions that authors of surveys report? Objectives of this systematic survey of surveys are to describe the characteristics and conduct of surveys and investigate the association of the conduct with the conclusions. STUDY DESIGN AND
SETTING: We randomly selected 180 surveys published over 1 year in core clinical journals that included a self-report instrument to elicit knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, and experiences regarding health. Study selection and abstraction was independent and in duplicate. We calculated frequencies of descriptive data. We conducted multivariable logistic regression analyses to assess the association of strong or weak conclusions with survey methods.
RESULTS: Our results suggest that authors who validate questions in their survey make strong conclusions. We found that strong conclusions may not be associated with response rates or number of respondents. However, it did not appear that journal impact factor was related to strong conclusions.
CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that users of surveys should not rely on the conclusions of authors. A critical appraisal tool for users of surveys and guidance for authors about factors to consider when making conclusions would be helpful.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bias; Communication; Conclusions; Questionnaires; Reporting; Surveys

Year:  2020        PMID: 32068102     DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.01.019

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol        ISSN: 0895-4356            Impact factor:   6.437


  5 in total

Review 1.  Patient reported outcomes in oncology: changing perspectives-a systematic review.

Authors:  Augusta Silveira; Teresa Sequeira; Joaquim Gonçalves; Pedro Lopes Ferreira
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2022-05-21       Impact factor: 3.077

2.  Using a distribution-based approach and systematic review methods to derive minimum clinically important differences.

Authors:  Jennifer A Watt; Areti Angeliki Veroniki; Andrea C Tricco; Sharon E Straus
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2021-02-26       Impact factor: 4.615

3.  Patient-reported outcome measures for masticatory function in adults: a systematic review.

Authors:  Yanpin Fan; Xin Shu; Katherine Chiu Man Leung; Edward Chin Man Lo
Journal:  BMC Oral Health       Date:  2021-11-23       Impact factor: 2.757

4.  High Surgical Complication Rates after Silicone Implant Use for Improvement of Glans Ridge Appearance.

Authors:  Soumya A Reddy; Curtis N Crane; Michael Safir; Richard A Santucci
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2022-07-22

5.  Plastic Surgery Training across Seven Continents: Results from the First Global Trainee Survey.

Authors:  Ebba K Lindqvist; Niels Noordzij; Shiv Chopra; Alfonso Navia; Laura Cappuyns; Amr Khalaf; Oscar F Fernandez Diaz; Juan Enrique Berner; Linda Monshizadeh; Robert X Murphy
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2022-10-07
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.