A Web-based survey among adults aged 40–54 years was time effective and yielded stable response patterns

Weigl, Korbinian; Tikk, Kaja; Hoffmeister, Michael; Toni, Enrico N. De; Hampe, Jochen; Kolligs, Frank T.; Klug, Stefanie J.; Mansmann, Ulrich; Nasseh, Daniel; Radlovic, Jovana; Schwab, Matthias; Schweigler, Dirk; Stephan, Anna Magdalena; Brenner, Hermann

doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.08.021

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The response-rate in this study is lower than reported for other similar online surveys, for example 7.5% was reported in a German study (6). A low response rate may be due to sending the link by regular mail rather than email.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 83%

The future of breast cancer screening: what do participants in a breast cancer screening program think about automation using artificial intelligence?

Jonmarker

Strand

Brandberg

et al. 2019

Acta Radiologica Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: If screening participants do not trust computerized decision-making, screening participation may be affected by the introduction of such methods. Purpose: To survey breast cancer screening participants' attitudes towards potential future uses of computerization. Material and Methods: A survey was constructed. Women in a breast cancer screening program were invited via the final report letter to participate. Data were collected from February 2018 to March 2019 and 2196 surveys were completed. Questions asked participants to rate propositions using Likert scales. Data analysis was done using v 2 and logistic regression tests. Results: The mean age of participants was 61 years. Response rate was 1.3%. Of the submitted surveys, 97.5% were complete; 38% of respondents reported a preference for a computer-only examination. The highest level of confidence was given a computer-only reading followed by a physician reading. Participants with > 12 years of education were more likely to prefer a computer-only reading (odds ratio [OR] 1.655, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.168-2.344), had a greater trust in letting a computer determine screening intervals and the need for a supplemental MRI (OR 1.606, 95% CI 1.171-2.202 and OR 1.577, 95% CI 1.107-2.247, respectively). Age was not found to be a significant predictor. Conclusion: A high level of trust in computerized decision-making was expressed. Higher age was associated with a lower understanding of technology but did not affect attitudes to computerized decision-making. A lower level of education was associated with a lower trust in computerization. This may be valuable knowledge for future studies.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 83%

The future of breast cancer screening: what do participants in a breast cancer screening program think about automation using artificial intelligence?

Jonmarker

Strand

Brandberg

et al. 2019

Acta Radiologica Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The response rate for the current study (16.9%) was relatively low. However, the response rate was similar to what has been found in other studies using a similar methodology ( Weigl et al, 2019 ). Additionally, the sample was representative with regard to demographics and responses on the CEFIS and other measures were not skewed, which reduces the concern for a selection bias.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Validation of the COVID-19 Exposure and Family Impact Scales

Enlow

Phan

Lewis

et al. 2021

Journal of Pediatric Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective The COVID-19 Exposure and Family Impact Scales (CEFIS) were developed in Spring 2020 to assess effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on families and caregivers. Initial psychometric properties were promising. The current study examined the factor structure and evaluated convergent and criterion validity of the CEFIS in a new sample. Methods In October and November 2020, caregivers (N = 2,531) of youth (0–21 years) scheduled for an ambulatory care visit at Nemours Children’s Hospital, Delaware completed the CEFIS and measures of convergent (PROMIS Global Mental Health Scale, Family Assessment Device) and criterion validity (PTSD Checklist—Civilian). Confirmatory factor analysis was used to examine the factor structure of the CEFIS. Bivariate correlations and logistic regression were used to examine convergent and criterion validity. Results Factor analysis supported the original six- and three-factor structures for the Exposure and Impact scales, respectively. Second-order factor analyses supported the use of Exposure, Impact, and Distress total scores. Higher scores on the CEFIS Exposure, Impact, and Distress scales were associated with increased mental health concerns and poorer family functioning. Higher scores on all CEFIS scales were also associated with greater odds of having clinically significant posttraumatic stress symptoms. Conclusions The CEFIS is a psychometrically sound measure of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on family and caregiver functioning and may also be useful in identifying families who would benefit from psychological supports.

show abstract

“…To maximize participant response rates a number of strategies were employed including: the use of both online and paper formats for the questionnaire; translation support for parents/caregivers; several personalized recruitment emails sent to parents/caregivers; and an offer of a prize as an incentive for parents/caregivers to take part in the evaluation (Dykema, Jones, Piché, & Stevenson, 2013;Sánchez-Fernández, Muñoz-Leiva, & Montoro-Ríos, 2012). These strategies resulted in a 28% response rate which is typical of online survey response rates (Poynton, DeFouw, & Morizio, 2019;Weigl et al, 2019). Responses were gained from parents/caregivers from diverse cultural backgrounds, ages and hearing loss, reflecting the diversity of the population accessing the service.…”

Section: Strengths and Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deaf and Hard of Hearing Early Intervention: Perceptions of Family-Centered Practice

Stewart

Slattery

McKee

2020

Journal of Early Intervention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This cross-sectional quantitative study investigated parents’ perceptions of the quality of family-centered practice in an early intervention service for young children who are deaf or hard of hearing through the use of the Measures of Processes of Care (MPOC-56). The results indicated that the majority of families accessing the service were satisfied with the family-centered practices they were receiving. Consistent with previous studies in different disability settings, families were least satisfied with the provision of general information regarding the child’s disability, identifying further access to unbiased information and resources is needed. This highlighted a tension in the role of organizations operating within individualized funding models in regard to who is responsible for the dissemination of reliable and evidence-based general information. As the MPOC-56 has not been used in deaf or hard of hearing populations previously, this study found it was an appropriate measure for caregiver perceptions of family-centered practice within this population.

show abstract

A Web-based survey among adults aged 40–54 years was time effective and yielded stable response patterns

Cited by 8 publications

References 25 publications

The future of breast cancer screening: what do participants in a breast cancer screening program think about automation using artificial intelligence?

The future of breast cancer screening: what do participants in a breast cancer screening program think about automation using artificial intelligence?

Validation of the COVID-19 Exposure and Family Impact Scales

Deaf and Hard of Hearing Early Intervention: Perceptions of Family-Centered Practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About