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...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
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 |