Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (40)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by SIEMIATYCKI, J.
Right arrow Articles by AUBERT, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by SIEMIATYCKI, J.
Right arrow Articles by AUBERT, D.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

American Journal of Epidemiology Vol. 120, No. 2: 302-314
Copyright © 1984 by The Johns Hopkins University School of Hygiene and Public Health

research-article

QUALITY OF RESPONSE IN DIFFERENT POPULATION GROUPS IN MAIL AND TELEPHONE SURVEYS

JACK SIEMIATYCKI1,2,, SALLY CAMPBELL1, LESLEY RICHARDSON1 and DENIS AUBERT1

1Centre de Recherche en Épidémiologie et Médecine Préventive, Institut Armand-Frappier Laval-dea-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-des-Rapides, Quebec, H7V 1B7, Canada

Mall and telephone survey methods, with follow-up by other methods, can provide high response rates. However, it is not clear whether different population groups provide responses of different quality, thus creating risk of biased comparisons. A closely related problem is whether proxy response adequately substitutes for self-response. This study addressed these issues in the context of parallel mail and telephone health surveys carried out in Montreal. In the telephone survey, proxy respondents provided lower estimates of morbidity and health care utilization than self-respondents; in the mail survey, there was no difference between proxy and self-response. Response validity was assessed by comparing reported physician visits with those recorded by the government-run universal health insurance plan. In general, mail responses were more valid than telephone responses. In both methods, there were suggestive but not persuasive differences in validity among sociodemographic subgroups. In both methods, those reporting illness or medication use had less underreporting of physician visits than those not reporting such things.

data collection; epidemiologic methods; health surveys; interviews; questionnaires; survey methods


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 GerontologistHome page
B. E. Fries, M. James, S. S. Hammer, L. R. Shugarman, and J. N. Morris
Is Telephone Screening Feasible? Accuracy and Cost-Effectiveness of Identifying People Medically Eligible for Home- and Community-Based Services
Gerontologist, October 1, 2004; 44(5): 680 - 688.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Aging HealthHome page
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]

Home page
 Eval RevHome page
J. L, K. E. Bauman, and G. G. Koch
High Intercommunity Variation in Adolescent Cigarette Smoking in a 10-Community Field Experiment
Eval Rev, April 1, 1992; 16(2): 115 - 130.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.