Literature DB >> 6461711

Investigating non-response bias in mail surveys.

K Sheikh, S Mattingly.   

Abstract

Losses in follow-up that are biased with respect to outcome invalidate the results. There are many ways of dealing with non-response in follow-up studies. Three separate methods were used to investigate a potential bias in a mail survey of 2471 disabled people. At a response rate of 84%, the non-respondents were significantly different from the respondents with respect to the outcome, return to work and vocational training. The success rate in terms of the outcome was negatively related to the number of reminders. Significant differences were found in response rates according to age, social class, impairments, previous employment record, and completion of rehabilitation courses. There is no safe level of response rates below 100%. However small the non-response, a possible bias as a result of it must be investigated.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1981        PMID: 6461711      PMCID: PMC1052180          DOI: 10.1136/jech.35.4.293

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health        ISSN: 0143-005X            Impact factor:   3.710


  3 in total

1.  Tracing patients.

Authors:  K M LAURENCE
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1959-08-29       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  Conduct of surveys.

Authors:  G Rose; D J Barker
Journal:  Br Med J       Date:  1978-10-28

3.  Professionals as responders: variations in and effects of response rates to questionnaires, 1961-77.

Authors:  A Cartwright
Journal:  Br Med J       Date:  1978-11-18
  3 in total
  43 in total

1.  Non-response and related factors in a nation-wide health survey.

Authors:  K Korkeila; S Suominen; J Ahvenainen; A Ojanlatva; P Rautava; H Helenius; M Koskenvuo
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 8.082

2.  Assessing non-response to a mailed health survey including self-collection of biological material.

Authors:  Anneli Uusküla; Mart Kals; Louise-Anne McNutt
Journal:  Eur J Public Health       Date:  2010-05-10       Impact factor: 3.367

3.  Response rates and response bias for 50 surveys of pediatricians.

Authors:  William L Cull; Karen G O'Connor; Sanford Sharp; Suk-fong S Tang
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 3.402

4.  Personal, social and environmental determinants of educational inequalities in walking: a multilevel study.

Authors:  Kylie Ball; Anna Timperio; Jo Salmon; Billie Giles-Corti; Rebecca Roberts; David Crawford
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 3.710

5.  Investigating response bias in an information technology survey of physicians.

Authors:  Nir Menachemi; Neset Hikmet; Mary Stutzman; Robert G Brooks
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 4.460

6.  Communication, perception and behaviour during a natural disaster involving a 'Do Not Drink' and a subsequent 'Boil Water' notice: a postal questionnaire study.

Authors:  Gabriella Rundblad; Olivia Knapton; Paul R Hunter
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2010-10-25       Impact factor: 3.295

7.  A descriptive study of persistent oxaliplatin-induced peripheral neuropathy in patients with colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Sina Vatandoust; Rohit Joshi; Kenneth B Pittman; Adrian Esterman; Vy Broadbridge; Jacqueline Adams; Nimit Singhal; Susan Yeend; Timothy Jay Price
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 3.603

8.  Factors affecting response rates to mailed preoperative surveys among arthroplasty patients.

Authors:  Wenbao Wang; Jeffrey A Geller; Abraham Kim; Todd A Morrison; Jung Keun Choi; William Macaulay
Journal:  World J Orthop       Date:  2012-01-18

9.  Survey response rates: national and regional differences in a European multicentre study of vertebral osteoporosis.

Authors:  T W O'Neill; D Marsden; C Matthis; H Raspe; A J Silman
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 3.710

10.  Comparison of participants and non-participants to the ORISCAV-LUX population-based study on cardiovascular risk factors in Luxembourg.

Authors:  Ala'a Alkerwi; Nicolas Sauvageot; Sophie Couffignal; Adelin Albert; Marie-Lise Lair; Michèle Guillaume
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2010-09-07       Impact factor: 4.615

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.