1 / 28

Improving Response Rates Lessons from Physician Surveys

Improving Response Rates Lessons from Physician Surveys. PMRS Ottawa Chapter February 26, 2004. Presentation Overview. Survey Response Rates: The state of the art Particularities of Physician Surveys Response rate boosting tactics: What works and what does not.

ata
Download Presentation

Improving Response Rates Lessons from Physician Surveys

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Improving Response RatesLessons from Physician Surveys PMRS Ottawa Chapter February 26, 2004

  2. Presentation Overview • Survey Response Rates: The state of the art • Particularities of Physician Surveys • Response rate boosting tactics: What works and what does not. • On the use of Monetary Incentives in Physician and Consumer Surveys • Q & A period

  3. Current response rates • Academic Surveys published between 1961 and 1977: 71% • Academic surveys published in 1991: 54% • Academic surveys published between 1986 and 1995, sample size over 1,000 respondents: 52% • Commercial/marketing physician surveys (2002): 20% • RETICULUM surveys: 12% to 66%

  4. Current response rates • Surveys of executives, published in 1991: 21% • PMRS Members surveys: 15.7%(1997);11.3% (2000); • One-time telephone surveys: 16% (1997); 13% (2002)

  5. Physician Surveys Particularities • More homogenous populations • Highly-regulated professionals Better sampling frames Better record-keeping

  6. Physician Surveys Particularities • Highly-solicited respondents • Highly-educated respondents • ‘Well-connected’ respondents

  7. Physician Surveys Particularities • Surrounded by ‘tough’ gatekeepers • ‘Addicted’ to monetary incentives

  8. Tactics that boost response by 50% or more • Monetary Incentives • Multiple contacts & multiple contact modes

  9. Monetary Incentives • (Gallagher, 2001) 1st contact by mail, no incentive: 11% 2nd contact by phone, no incentive: 22% (cumul) 3rd contact by courier, $20 incentive: 57% (cumul) • (Malin, 2000) 1st mailing, no incentive: 17% 2nd mailing, no incentive: 13% 3rd mailing, $50 incentive: 66% Cumulative response rate: 76%

  10. Multiple Contacts & Contact Modes • Typical response rates after multiple mailings: 1st mailing: X% 2nd mailing: X/2% 3rd mailing: X/4% • (CDC, 1997): 1st contact by First Class mail: 60% 2nd contact by Fedex: 72% (cumul) 3rd contact by phone: 96% (cumul)

  11. Tactics that boost response by a few % points • Pre-notification by phone • Personalization • Advertising the survey • Choice of sponsors • Shortening the questionnaire • Instituting a draw

  12. Pre-notification by phone • (Osborn, 1996) No Pre-notification: 64% Pre-notification: 77% • (Ward, 1994) No Pre-notification: 69% Pre-notification: 84%

  13. Personalization • First Class mail • Commemorative stamps • Stamped return envelope • Name & address printed on the envelope • Personalized salutation • Full date on Cover Letter • Handwritten signature • Handwritten note

  14. Personalization • (Maheux, 1989) Handwritten ‘thank you’ note: 30% No ‘thank you’ note: 22% • (Streiff, 1999) Stamped return envelope: 38% Business-reply envelope: 32%

  15. Choice of sponsor • (Asch, 1994) Veteran Affairs return address pulled 20% more than a Hospital Department of Medicine • (RETICULUM, 2000) A joint study with IMS Health, Royal College, College of Family Physicians: 22% IMS Health alone: 12%

  16. Tactics that don’t boost response • Pre-notification by mail • Offering non-monetary incentives (pens, mouse pads, candy, booklets, software..) • Mailing surveys on a specific day of the week • Promising anonymity • Gimmicks

  17. On the use of Monetary Incentives Even symbolic sums will boost response • (Everett,1997) $0: 45% $1: 63% (one-dollar bill included in mailing) • (Donaldson, 1999) $0: 46% $5: 58% (five-dollar cheque included)

  18. On the use of Monetary Incentives Larger incentives, Higher response rates • (Asch, 1998) $2 incentive: 46% $5 incentive: 63% • (Gunn, 1981) $0 incentive: 58% $25 incentive: 69% $50 incentive: 77%

  19. On the use of Monetary Incentives Larger incentives, Higher response rates: UP TO A POINT • (VanGeest, 2001) $5 incentive: 60% ; $10 incentive: 68% $20 incentive: 67% • (RETICULUM/ IMS Health, 2000) $25 incentive: 22%; $50 incentive: 34% $75 incentive: 36%

  20. On the use of Monetary Incentives Pre-paid incentives outperform Post-paid incentives • (Berry, 1987) $20 incentive, pre-paid: 78% $20 incentive, post-paid: 66%

  21. Monetary Incentives in Lay Surveys • Sparse data • Controversial practice • Banned in certain jurisdictions

  22. Monetary Incentives in Lay Surveys • (James & Bolstein, 1992) $0: 52% $2: 64% • (Dillman and al., 1999) in 5 different studies $2 incentive: boosted response by 19 to 31%

  23. Monetary Incentives in Lay Surveys • Pre-paid incentives will outperform post-paid incentives • (Johnson & McLaughlin, 1990): $5 pre-paid: 83% $10 post-paid: 72% • (James & Bolstein, 1992): survey of small contractors $1 pre-paid: 64% $5 pre-paid: 72% $50 post-paid: 57%

  24. On the use of Monetary Incentives • Why and how do they work???

  25. On the use of Monetary Incentives • Respondent appreciated, not taken for granted • Value-creating • Attention grabbing: Secretary • Attention grabbing: Physician • Pre-paid incentives: create trust

  26. On the use of Monetary Incentives The Pitfalls: • Point of no-return • Cost • Fraud • Ethical Issues

  27. On the use of Monetary Incentives • Pre-paid incentives • (Gallagher, 2001) 46% replied 3% declined and returned the 20-dollar pre-paid incentive 51% declined, but pocketed the 20-dollar pre-paid incentive

  28. PMRS Ottawa Chapter • Thank you very much • Q & A (in both official languages!)

More Related