Are high response rates essential to valid surveys?

Leslie, Larry L.

doi:10.1016/0049-089x(72)90080-4

Cited by 153 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Researchers surveying issues directly related to homogeneous groups should not be overly concerned about the percentage of questionnaire returns, as the representativeness will probably be high. This presumes, however, that enough responses are received to meet statistical assumptions (Leslie, 1972). Perhaps the most challenging aspect of using the Internet for survey research is the lack of research guidelines.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The views of physicians and politicians concerning age‐related prioritisation in healthcare

Werntoft

Edberg

2009

Journal of Health Organization and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

2 ABSTRACT Purpose of this paperThe aim of this study was to describe the view of age-related prioritisation in health care among physicians and healthcare politicians and to compare their views regarding gender and age. MethodologySwedish physicians (n=390) and politicians (n=310), mean age 52 years, answered an electronic questionnaire concerning age-related priority setting in healthcare. The questionnaire had fixed response alternatives with possibility of adding comments. FindingsA majority of the participants thought that age should not influence prioritisation, although more physicians than politicians thought that younger patients should be prioritised. There were also significant differences concerning their views on lifestyle-related diseases and on who should make decisions concerning both vertical and horizontal prioritisation. The comments indicated that the politicians referred to ethical principles as a basis for their standpoints while the physicians often referred to the importance of biological rather than chronological age. Research limitationsWeb-based surveys as a method has its limitations as biased samples and biased returns could cause major problems, such as limited control over the drop-outs. The sample in this study was, however, judged to be representative. 3 Practical implicationsThe results indicate that supplementary guiding principles concerning prioritisation in healthcare are needed in order to facilitate decision-making concerning resource allocation on a local level. The value of the paperThis paper adds important knowledge about decision makers' views on age-related priorities in healthcare, thus contributing to scientific base for prioritisation in healthcare and the ongoing debate in society.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The views of physicians and politicians concerning age‐related prioritisation in healthcare

Werntoft

Edberg

2009

Journal of Health Organization and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nevertheless web-based methods have many important advantages over traditional methods and, according to Leslie [25], researchers surveying issues directly related to homogeneous groups should not be overly concerned about the percentage of questionnaire returns, as the representativeness will probably be high. Leslie [25] however, emphasizes that this presumes that enough responses are received to meet statistical assumptions. Even if the response rate in this study was low, there is no indication that the drop out was systematic as the sample was considered to be representative concerning age, experience and political affiliation.…”

Section: Methodological Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decision makers’ experiences of prioritisation and views about how to finance healthcare costs

Werntoft

Edberg

2009

Health Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Access to the published version may require journal subscription. Published with permission from: Elsevier costs. An additional aim was to compare the views of politicians and physicians. Methods:The study was a cross-sectional study based on a questionnaire administered to 700Swedish politicians and physicians. This was analysed using both quantitative and qualitative methods. Results: A majority of the decision makers (55%) suggested that increasing costs should be financed through higher taxation but more physicians than politicians thought that higher patient fees, private health insurance and a reduction in social expenditure were better alternatives. Prioritisation aroused anxiety; politicians were afraid of displeasing voters while physicians were afraid of making medically incorrect decisions. Conclusions: This study don't answer the question about how to make prioritisation in health care but the result highlights the different ways that the decision makers view the subject and thereby elicit that publicly elected politicians and physicians perhaps not always work with the same goal ahead.There are needs for more research but also more media focus on the subject so the citizens will be aware and take part in the debate.

show abstract

“…To ensure that sample bias and non-response bias were not present, appropriate comparisons were made between early and late respondents, and respondents and non-respondents (Lesley 1972;Armstrong and Overton 1977).…”

Section: Scale Development Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%