Cargando…

Effect on survey response rate of hand written versus printed signature on a covering letter: randomised controlled trial [ISRCTN67566265]

BACKGROUND: It is important that response rates to postal surveys are as high as possible to ensure that the results are representative and to maximise statistical power. Previous research has suggested that any personalisation of approach helps to improve the response rate. This experiment tested w...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: McKenzie-McHarg, Kirstie, Tully, Lucy, Gates, Simon, Ayers, Sarah, Brocklehurst, Peter
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2005
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1190172/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16091137
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-5-52
_version_ 1782124798072061952
author McKenzie-McHarg, Kirstie
Tully, Lucy
Gates, Simon
Ayers, Sarah
Brocklehurst, Peter
author_facet McKenzie-McHarg, Kirstie
Tully, Lucy
Gates, Simon
Ayers, Sarah
Brocklehurst, Peter
author_sort McKenzie-McHarg, Kirstie
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: It is important that response rates to postal surveys are as high as possible to ensure that the results are representative and to maximise statistical power. Previous research has suggested that any personalisation of approach helps to improve the response rate. This experiment tested whether personalising questionnaires by hand signing the covering letter improved the response rate compared with a non-personalised group where the investigator's signature on the covering letter was scanned into the document and printed. METHODS: Randomised controlled trial. Questionnaires about surgical techniques of caesarean section were mailed to 3,799 Members and Fellows of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists resident in the UK. Individuals were randomly allocated to receive a covering letter with either a computer printed signature or a hand written signature. Two reminders were sent to non-respondents. The outcome measures were the proportion of questionnaires returned and their time to return. RESULTS: The response rate was 79.1% (1506/1905) in the hand-signed group and 78.4% (1484/1894) in the scanned and printed signature group. There was no detectable difference between the groups in response rate or time taken to respond. CONCLUSION: No advantage was detected to hand signing the covering letter accompanying a postal questionnaire to health professionals.
format Text
id pubmed-1190172
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2005
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-11901722005-08-25 Effect on survey response rate of hand written versus printed signature on a covering letter: randomised controlled trial [ISRCTN67566265] McKenzie-McHarg, Kirstie Tully, Lucy Gates, Simon Ayers, Sarah Brocklehurst, Peter BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: It is important that response rates to postal surveys are as high as possible to ensure that the results are representative and to maximise statistical power. Previous research has suggested that any personalisation of approach helps to improve the response rate. This experiment tested whether personalising questionnaires by hand signing the covering letter improved the response rate compared with a non-personalised group where the investigator's signature on the covering letter was scanned into the document and printed. METHODS: Randomised controlled trial. Questionnaires about surgical techniques of caesarean section were mailed to 3,799 Members and Fellows of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists resident in the UK. Individuals were randomly allocated to receive a covering letter with either a computer printed signature or a hand written signature. Two reminders were sent to non-respondents. The outcome measures were the proportion of questionnaires returned and their time to return. RESULTS: The response rate was 79.1% (1506/1905) in the hand-signed group and 78.4% (1484/1894) in the scanned and printed signature group. There was no detectable difference between the groups in response rate or time taken to respond. CONCLUSION: No advantage was detected to hand signing the covering letter accompanying a postal questionnaire to health professionals. BioMed Central 2005-08-09 /pmc/articles/PMC1190172/ /pubmed/16091137 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-5-52 Text en Copyright © 2005 McKenzie-McHarg et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
McKenzie-McHarg, Kirstie
Tully, Lucy
Gates, Simon
Ayers, Sarah
Brocklehurst, Peter
Effect on survey response rate of hand written versus printed signature on a covering letter: randomised controlled trial [ISRCTN67566265]
title Effect on survey response rate of hand written versus printed signature on a covering letter: randomised controlled trial [ISRCTN67566265]
title_full Effect on survey response rate of hand written versus printed signature on a covering letter: randomised controlled trial [ISRCTN67566265]
title_fullStr Effect on survey response rate of hand written versus printed signature on a covering letter: randomised controlled trial [ISRCTN67566265]
title_full_unstemmed Effect on survey response rate of hand written versus printed signature on a covering letter: randomised controlled trial [ISRCTN67566265]
title_short Effect on survey response rate of hand written versus printed signature on a covering letter: randomised controlled trial [ISRCTN67566265]
title_sort effect on survey response rate of hand written versus printed signature on a covering letter: randomised controlled trial [isrctn67566265]
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1190172/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16091137
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-5-52
work_keys_str_mv AT mckenziemchargkirstie effectonsurveyresponserateofhandwrittenversusprintedsignatureonacoveringletterrandomisedcontrolledtrialisrctn67566265
AT tullylucy effectonsurveyresponserateofhandwrittenversusprintedsignatureonacoveringletterrandomisedcontrolledtrialisrctn67566265
AT gatessimon effectonsurveyresponserateofhandwrittenversusprintedsignatureonacoveringletterrandomisedcontrolledtrialisrctn67566265
AT ayerssarah effectonsurveyresponserateofhandwrittenversusprintedsignatureonacoveringletterrandomisedcontrolledtrialisrctn67566265
AT brocklehurstpeter effectonsurveyresponserateofhandwrittenversusprintedsignatureonacoveringletterrandomisedcontrolledtrialisrctn67566265