Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Evaluation & the Health Professions
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
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 Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Schoenman, J. A.
Right arrow Articles by Singer, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Schoenman, J. A.
Right arrow Articles by Singer, A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Impact Of Differential Response Rates On The Quality Of Data Collected In The CTS Physician Survey

Julie A. Schoenman

Marc L. Berk

Jacob J. Feldman

Andrew Singer

Project HOPE Center for Health Affairs

Survey administrators face trade-offs between expending additional survey resources to maximize response rates versus using fewer resources and accepting lower response rates. Using data from the Community Tracking Study’s Physician Survey, we examined how survey estimates and data quality changed as additional respondents completed the survey. Results showed that improvements in response rates over the range examined (i.e., up to 65%) did not change estimates appreciably nor affect data quality. As long as these results are not overstated to imply that extremely low response rates are credible, this study may permit researchers to disseminate interesting results in peer-reviewed journals even when the response rate falls slightly short of current standards. It must also be emphasized, however, that we were unable to measure the nonresponse effect of those who were never interviewed. Achieving a response rate significantly above 65% might have changed the survey results appreciably.

Key Words: survey methods • response rates • data quality • physician surveys

Evaluation & the Health Professions, Vol. 26, No. 1, 23-42 (2003)
DOI: 10.1177/0163278702250077
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?