Cargando…

International health policy survey in 11 countries: assessment of non-response bias in the Norwegian sample

BACKGROUND: International health policy surveys are used to compare and evaluate health system performance, but little is known about the effects of non-response. The objective of this study was to assess the effects of non-response in the Norwegian part of the Commonwealth Fund international health...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bjertnaes, Oyvind A, Iversen, Hilde H, Bukholm, Geir
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2833149/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20146819
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-10-38
_version_ 1782178359530225664
author Bjertnaes, Oyvind A
Iversen, Hilde H
Bukholm, Geir
author_facet Bjertnaes, Oyvind A
Iversen, Hilde H
Bukholm, Geir
author_sort Bjertnaes, Oyvind A
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: International health policy surveys are used to compare and evaluate health system performance, but little is known about the effects of non-response. The objective of this study was to assess the effects of non-response in the Norwegian part of the Commonwealth Fund international health policy survey in 2009. METHODS: As part of an international health policy survey in 2009 a cross-sectional survey was conducted in Norway among a representative sample of Norwegian general practitioners. 1 400 randomly selected GPs were sent a postal questionnaire including questions about the Norwegian health care system, the quality of the GPs' own practice and the cooperation with specialist health care. The survey included three postal reminders and a telephone follow-up of postal non-respondents. The main outcome measures were increase in response rate for each reminder, the effects of demographic and practice variables on response, the effects of non-response on survey estimates, and the cost-effectiveness of each reminder. RESULTS: After three postal reminders and one telephone follow-up, the response rate was 59.1%. Statistically significant differences between respondents and non-respondents were found for three variables; group vs. solo practice (p = 0.01), being a specialist or not (p < 0.001) and municipality centrality (least central vs. most central, p = 0.03). However, demographic and practice variables had little association with five outcome variables and the overall survey estimates changed little with additional reminders. In addition, the cost-effectiveness of the final reminders was poor. CONCLUSIONS: The response rate in the Norwegian survey was satisfactory, and the effect of non-response was small indicating adequate representativeness. The cost-effectiveness of the final reminders was poor. The Norwegian findings strengthen the international project, but restrictions in generalizability warrant further study in other countries.
format Text
id pubmed-2833149
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-28331492010-03-06 International health policy survey in 11 countries: assessment of non-response bias in the Norwegian sample Bjertnaes, Oyvind A Iversen, Hilde H Bukholm, Geir BMC Health Serv Res Research article BACKGROUND: International health policy surveys are used to compare and evaluate health system performance, but little is known about the effects of non-response. The objective of this study was to assess the effects of non-response in the Norwegian part of the Commonwealth Fund international health policy survey in 2009. METHODS: As part of an international health policy survey in 2009 a cross-sectional survey was conducted in Norway among a representative sample of Norwegian general practitioners. 1 400 randomly selected GPs were sent a postal questionnaire including questions about the Norwegian health care system, the quality of the GPs' own practice and the cooperation with specialist health care. The survey included three postal reminders and a telephone follow-up of postal non-respondents. The main outcome measures were increase in response rate for each reminder, the effects of demographic and practice variables on response, the effects of non-response on survey estimates, and the cost-effectiveness of each reminder. RESULTS: After three postal reminders and one telephone follow-up, the response rate was 59.1%. Statistically significant differences between respondents and non-respondents were found for three variables; group vs. solo practice (p = 0.01), being a specialist or not (p < 0.001) and municipality centrality (least central vs. most central, p = 0.03). However, demographic and practice variables had little association with five outcome variables and the overall survey estimates changed little with additional reminders. In addition, the cost-effectiveness of the final reminders was poor. CONCLUSIONS: The response rate in the Norwegian survey was satisfactory, and the effect of non-response was small indicating adequate representativeness. The cost-effectiveness of the final reminders was poor. The Norwegian findings strengthen the international project, but restrictions in generalizability warrant further study in other countries. BioMed Central 2010-02-10 /pmc/articles/PMC2833149/ /pubmed/20146819 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-10-38 Text en Copyright ©2010 Bjertnaes 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
Bjertnaes, Oyvind A
Iversen, Hilde H
Bukholm, Geir
International health policy survey in 11 countries: assessment of non-response bias in the Norwegian sample
title International health policy survey in 11 countries: assessment of non-response bias in the Norwegian sample
title_full International health policy survey in 11 countries: assessment of non-response bias in the Norwegian sample
title_fullStr International health policy survey in 11 countries: assessment of non-response bias in the Norwegian sample
title_full_unstemmed International health policy survey in 11 countries: assessment of non-response bias in the Norwegian sample
title_short International health policy survey in 11 countries: assessment of non-response bias in the Norwegian sample
title_sort international health policy survey in 11 countries: assessment of non-response bias in the norwegian sample
topic Research article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2833149/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20146819
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-10-38
work_keys_str_mv AT bjertnaesoyvinda internationalhealthpolicysurveyin11countriesassessmentofnonresponsebiasinthenorwegiansample
AT iversenhildeh internationalhealthpolicysurveyin11countriesassessmentofnonresponsebiasinthenorwegiansample
AT bukholmgeir internationalhealthpolicysurveyin11countriesassessmentofnonresponsebiasinthenorwegiansample