Literature DB >> 7589949

Reducing systematic bias in studies of general practitioners: the use of a medical peer in the recruitment of general practitioners in research.

A Heywood1, P Mudge, I Ring, R Sanson-Fisher.   

Abstract

Reducing systematic bias in any group of study participants should be a priority of any researcher. This can be achieved by ensuring the sampling framework is adequate and by increasing response rates. Response rates in studies of general practitioners have to date tended to be low. Generalization of results to the wider population of GPs is therefore reduced. This paper systematically examines those factors which can reduce bias, recognising accurate identification of the target population, gaining good access to respondents, and maximising response rates as crucial factors. The importance of a medical peer in recruitment is examined. Applying these factors to a study situation, three different recruitment strategies were tested. As the strategy improved, there was an incremental improvement in the response rate (44%, 67%, 78%). These results indicate that by specifically addressing strategies which facilitate access to the target population, and increase the legitimacy and credibility of the study, significant improvements in response rates can be achieved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7589949     DOI: 10.1093/fampra/12.2.227

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Fam Pract        ISSN: 0263-2136            Impact factor:   2.267


  11 in total

1.  Value of recruitment strategies used in a primary care practice-based trial.

Authors:  Shellie D Ellis; Alain G Bertoni; Denise E Bonds; C Randall Clinch; Aarthi Balasubramanyam; Caroline Blackwell; Haiying Chen; Michael Lischke; David C Goff
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2006-09-01       Impact factor: 2.226

2.  Clinical trials in primary care: targeted payments for trials might help improve recruitment and quality.

Authors:  R Foy; J Parry; B McAvoy
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1998-10-31

3.  General practice postal surveys: a questionnaire too far?

Authors:  B R McAvoy; E F Kaner
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-09-21

4.  Recruiting Practices for Change Initiatives Is Hard: Findings From EvidenceNOW.

Authors:  Shannon M Sweeney; Jennifer D Hall; Sarah S Ono; Leah Gordon; David Cameron; Jennifer Hemler; Leif I Solberg; Benjamin F Crabtree; Deborah J Cohen
Journal:  Am J Med Qual       Date:  2017-09-04       Impact factor: 1.852

5.  [The stable patient collective as a potential pitfall of prospective primary health-care studies. A qualitative inquiry among general practitioners].

Authors:  Dirk Mosshammer; Gernot Lorenz; Iris Natanzon
Journal:  Med Klin (Munich)       Date:  2009-10-25

Review 6.  Increasing response rates from physicians in oncology research: a structured literature review and data from a recent physician survey.

Authors:  Y Martins; R I Lederman; C L Lowenstein; S Joffe; B A Neville; B T Hastings; G A Abel
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2012-02-28       Impact factor: 7.640

7.  Getting physicians to open the survey: little evidence that an envelope teaser increases response rates.

Authors:  Jeanette Y Ziegenfuss; Kelly Burmeister; Katherine M James; Lindsey Haas; Jon C Tilburt; Timothy J Beebe
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2012-03-31       Impact factor: 4.615

8.  General practitioners' attitudes towards research in primary care: qualitative results of a cross sectional study.

Authors:  Thomas Rosemann; Joachim Szecsenyi
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2004-12-21       Impact factor: 2.497

9.  Effectiveness of monetary incentives to recruit family physicians as study subjects: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Anik M C Giguere; Michel Labrecque; Francine Borduas; Michel Rouleau
Journal:  BMC Res Notes       Date:  2015-01-23

10.  Effectiveness of strategies to encourage general practitioners to accept an offer of free access to online evidence-based information: a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Heather Buchan; Emma Lourey; Catherine D'Este; Rob Sanson-Fisher
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2009-10-20       Impact factor: 7.327

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.