Increasing response rates to postal questionnaires: systematic review - PubMed (original) (raw)

Review

Increasing response rates to postal questionnaires: systematic review

Phil Edwards et al. BMJ. 2002.

Abstract

Objective: To identify methods to increase response to postal questionnaires.

Design: Systematic review of randomised controlled trials of any method to influence response to postal questionnaires.

Studies reviewed: 292 randomised controlled trials including 258 315 participants INTERVENTION REVIEWED: 75 strategies for influencing response to postal questionnaires.

Main outcome measure: The proportion of completed or partially completed questionnaires returned.

Results: The odds of response were more than doubled when a monetary incentive was used (odds ratio 2.02; 95% confidence interval 1.79 to 2.27) and almost doubled when incentives were not conditional on response (1.71; 1.29 to 2.26). Response was more likely when short questionnaires were used (1.86; 1.55 to 2.24). Personalised questionnaires and letters increased response (1.16; 1.06 to 1.28), as did the use of coloured ink (1.39; 1.16 to 1.67). The odds of response were more than doubled when the questionnaires were sent by recorded delivery (2.21; 1.51 to 3.25) and increased when stamped return envelopes were used (1.26; 1.13 to 1.41) and questionnaires were sent by first class post (1.12; 1.02 to 1.23). Contacting participants before sending questionnaires increased response (1.54; 1.24 to 1.92), as did follow up contact (1.44; 1.22 to 1.70) and providing non-respondents with a second copy of the questionnaire (1.41; 1.02 to 1.94). Questionnaires designed to be of more interest to participants were more likely to be returned (2.44; 1.99 to 3.01), but questionnaires containing questions of a sensitive nature were less likely to be returned (0.92; 0.87 to 0.98). Questionnaires originating from universities were more likely to be returned than were questionnaires from other sources, such as commercial organisations (1.31; 1.11 to 1.54).

Conclusions: Health researchers using postal questionnaires can improve the quality of their research by using the strategies shown to be effective in this systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure

Figure

Effects on questionnaire response of 40 strategies where combined trials included over 1000 participants

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Armstrong BK, White E, Saracci R. Principles of exposure measurement in epidemiology. Monographs in epidemiology and biostatistics. Vol. 21. New York: Oxford University Press; 1995. pp. 294–321.
    1. Edwards P, Clarke M, DiGuiseppi C, Pratap S, Roberts I, Wentz R. Identification of randomised controlled trials in systematic reviews: accuracy and reliability of screening records. Stat Med (in press). - PubMed
    1. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple graphical test. BMJ. 1997;315:629–634. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Yammarino FJ, Skinner SJ, Childers TL. Understanding mail survey response behavior: a meta-analysis. Publ Opin Q. 1991;55:613–639.
    1. Clarke MJ, Stewart LA. Obtaining data from randomised controlled trials: how much do we need for reliable and informative meta-analyses? BMJ. 1994;309:1007–1010. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources