American Journal of Epidemiology Vol. 120, No. 2: 291-301
Copyright © 1984 by The Johns Hopkins University School of Hygiene and Public Health
research-article |
NONRESPONSE BIAS AND EARLY VERSUS ALL RESPONDERS IN MAIL AND TELEPHONE SURVEYS
1Centre de Recherche en Épidemiologie et Médecine Préventive, Institut Armand Frappier Laval-des-Rapides, Quebec
2Department of Epidemiology and Health, McGill University Montreal
Reprint requests to; Dr. J. Siemiatycki, CREMP, Institut Armand-Frappier, 531 boulevard des Prairies, Laval-dea-Rapides, Quebec, H7V 1B7, Canada
Mall and telephone survey methods, with or without follow-up by other methods, are cost-effectIve alternatives to the conventional home interview approach. However, It has long been thought that they are especially susceptible to nonresponse bias. The study addressed this issue in the context of parallel mall and telephone health surveys carried out in Montreal. The mall strategy among 1,555 adults achieved 68.5% response and follow-up by telephone and home interview increased response to 80.9%. Respondents were adequately representative of the entire sample with respect to socioeconomic status, number of adults in household, and ethnic distribution. The 68.5% initial stage respondents were similar to all respondents on the above variables as well as on age, sex, education and reported health status. Odds ratios of smoking and respiratory symptoms hardly differed between initial stage and all respondents. The telephone survey among 1,595 adults achieved 72.7% response and follow-up by mall and personal interview increased response to 88.27%. Comparisons between respondents and the entire sample and between initial stage respondents and all respondents gave similar results to those found in the mall strategy, although there was some change in a symptom-smoking odds ratIo from the initial stage respondents to all respondents. In both survey strategies, there was no evidence of substantial nonresponse bias and estimates of morbidity and health care would not have differed much if the fieldwork had stopped at the initial mail or telephone stage.
data collection; epidemiologic methods; health surveys; Interviews; questionnaires; survey methods
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  A. D. Steffen, L. N. Kolonel, A. M. Nomura, F. S. Nagamine, K. R. Monroe, and L. R. Wilkens The Effect of Multiple Mailings on Recruitment: The Multiethnic Cohort Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., February 1, 2008; 17(2): 447 - 454. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A Saraux, F Guillemin, P Guggenbuhl, C H Roux, P Fardellone, E Le Bihan, A Cantagrel, I Chary-Valckenaere, L Euller-Ziegler, R-M Flipo, et al. Prevalence of spondyloarthropathies in France: 2001 Ann Rheum Dis, October 1, 2005; 64(10): 1431 - 1435. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 C. Baggott, I. L. Beale, M. J. Dodd, and P. M. Kato A Survey of Self-Care and Dependent-Care Advice Given by Pediatric Oncology Nurses Journal of Pediatric Oncology Nursing, July 1, 2004; 21(4): 214 - 222. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Rogers, M. A. Murtaugh, S. Edwards, and M. L. Slattery Contacting Controls: Are We Working Harder for Similar Response Rates, and Does It Make a Difference? Am. J. Epidemiol., July 1, 2004; 160(1): 85 - 90. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Stang and K.-H. Jockel Studies with Low Response Proportions May Be Less Biased than Studies with High Response Proportions Am. J. Epidemiol., January 15, 2004; 159(2): 204 - 210. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. M. Doody, A. S. Sigurdson, D. Kampa, K. Chimes, B. H. Alexander, E. Ron, R. E. Tarone, and M. S. Linet Randomized Trial of Financial Incentives and Delivery Methods for Improving Response to a Mailed Questionnaire Am. J. Epidemiol., April 1, 2003; 157(7): 643 - 651. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Brogger, P. Bakke, G. E. Eide, and A. Gulsvik Contribution of Follow-up of Nonresponders to Prevalence and Risk Estimates: A Norwegian Respiratory Health Survey Am. J. Epidemiol., March 15, 2003; 157(6): 558 - 566. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D M Purdie, M P Dunne, F M Boyle, M D Cook, and J M Najman Health and demographic characteristics of respondents in an Australian national sexuality survey: comparison with population norms J Epidemiol Community Health, October 1, 2002; 56(10): 748 - 753. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. Manjer, S. Elmstahl, L. Janzon, and G. Berglund Invitation to a population-based cohort study: differences between subjects recruited using various strategies Scand J Public Health, April 1, 2002; 30(2): 103 - 112. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Goldberg, J. F. Chastang, A. Leclerc, M. Zins, S. Bonenfant, I. Bugel, N. Kaniewski, A. Schmaus, I. Niedhammer, M. Piciotti, et al. Socioeconomic, Demographic, Occupational, and Health Factors Associated with Participation in a Long-term Epidemiologic Survey: A Prospective Study of the French GAZEL Cohort and Its Target Population Am. J. Epidemiol., August 15, 2001; 154(4): 373 - 384. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H S J Picavet National health surveys by mail or home interview: effects on response J Epidemiol Community Health, June 1, 2001; 55(6): 408 - 413. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. A. Pruchno and J. M. Hayden Interview Modality: Effects on Costs and Data Quality in a Sample of Older Women J Aging Health, February 1, 2000; 12(1): 3 - 24. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. I. Woodruff, C. C. Edwards, and T. L. Conway Enhancing Response Rates To a Smoking Survey for Enlisted U.S. Navy Women Eval Rev, December 1, 1998; 22(6): 780 - 791. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. Lund and I. T. Gram Response rate according to title and length of questionnaire Scand J Public Health, April 1, 1998; 26(2): 154 - 160. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. G. Zapka, L. Chasan-Taber, C. Bigelow, and T. Hurley Methodological Issues for Health-Related Surveys of Multicultural Older Women Eval Health Prof, December 1, 1994; 17(4): 485 - 500. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|