| Literature DB >> 696701 |
Abstract
A perennial problem for mental health planners is assessing community needs and existing services. The three most common methods used to obtain this data are the telephone survey, the mail-out questionnaire, and the face-to-face interview. However, there are advantages and disadvantages associated with each approach in terms of sampling, response rates, and economic costs. The present study utilized all three methods to survey the same community population in order to determine the comparability of obtained data and relative efficacy of the methods. A standard 21-item questionnaire was developed to obtain demographic and epidemiological data. This included nine Likert-type items to obtain opionions on a typical question such as "To what extent would you have confidence in recommending the Mental Health Center to members of your immediate family?" In the first method, survey teams made door-to-door interviews to complete 449 questionnaires on a random sample. In the second method, 1,000 questionnaires were mailed to a random sample with returns requested. In the third method, 224 people were randomly selected from the telephone directory and asked to respond to the questionnaire over the phone. Precautions were taken in all methods to ensure confidentiality of responses. All respondents were classified according to a two-factor index based on occupation and education. The data were analyed to determine whether comparable data were obtained through divergent methods. Results are discussed and implications are given for community mental health planners.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 1978 PMID: 696701 DOI: 10.1007/BF00885530
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Am J Community Psychol ISSN: 0091-0562