Cargando…
Enclosing a pen to improve response rate to postal questionnaire: an embedded randomised controlled trial
Background: Poor response to questionnaires collecting outcome data in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) can affect the validity of trial results. The aim of this study within a trial (SWAT) was to evaluate the effectiveness of including a pen with a follow-up postal questionnaire on response rate...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
F1000 Research Limited
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7941094/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33728040 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.23651.1 |
_version_ | 1783662086649282560 |
---|---|
author | Cunningham-Burley, Rachel Roche, Jenny Fairhurst, Caroline Cockayne, Sarah Hewitt, Catherine Iles-Smith, Heather Torgerson, David J. |
author_facet | Cunningham-Burley, Rachel Roche, Jenny Fairhurst, Caroline Cockayne, Sarah Hewitt, Catherine Iles-Smith, Heather Torgerson, David J. |
author_sort | Cunningham-Burley, Rachel |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background: Poor response to questionnaires collecting outcome data in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) can affect the validity of trial results. The aim of this study within a trial (SWAT) was to evaluate the effectiveness of including a pen with a follow-up postal questionnaire on response rate. Methods: A two-armed RCT was embedded within SSHeW (Stopping Slips among Healthcare Workers), a trial of slip-resistant footwear to reduce slips in NHS staff. Participants were randomised 1:1 to receive a pen or no pen with their follow-up questionnaire. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants who returned the questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were: time to response, completeness of response, and whether a postal reminder notice was required. Data were analysed using logistic regression, linear regression and Cox proportional hazards regression. Results: Overall, 1466 SSHEW trial participants were randomised into the SWAT. In total, 13 withdrew from the host trial before they were due to be sent their follow-up questionnaire, 728 participants received a pen with their questionnaire, and 725 did not receive a pen. A questionnaire was returned from 67.7% of the pen group and 64.7% of the group who did not receive a pen. There was no significant difference in return rates between the two groups (OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.43, p=0.22), nor level of completeness of the questionnaires (AMD -0.01, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.05, p=0.77). There was weak evidence of a reduction in the proportion of participants requiring a reminder and in time to response in the pen group. Conclusion: Inclusion of a pen with the follow-up postal questionnaire sent to participants in the SSHeW trial did not statistically significantly increase the response rate. These results add to the body of evidence around improving response rates in trials. Trial registration: ISRCTN 33051393 (for SSHEW). Registered on 14/03/2017. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7941094 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | F1000 Research Limited |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-79410942021-03-15 Enclosing a pen to improve response rate to postal questionnaire: an embedded randomised controlled trial Cunningham-Burley, Rachel Roche, Jenny Fairhurst, Caroline Cockayne, Sarah Hewitt, Catherine Iles-Smith, Heather Torgerson, David J. F1000Res Research Article Background: Poor response to questionnaires collecting outcome data in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) can affect the validity of trial results. The aim of this study within a trial (SWAT) was to evaluate the effectiveness of including a pen with a follow-up postal questionnaire on response rate. Methods: A two-armed RCT was embedded within SSHeW (Stopping Slips among Healthcare Workers), a trial of slip-resistant footwear to reduce slips in NHS staff. Participants were randomised 1:1 to receive a pen or no pen with their follow-up questionnaire. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants who returned the questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were: time to response, completeness of response, and whether a postal reminder notice was required. Data were analysed using logistic regression, linear regression and Cox proportional hazards regression. Results: Overall, 1466 SSHEW trial participants were randomised into the SWAT. In total, 13 withdrew from the host trial before they were due to be sent their follow-up questionnaire, 728 participants received a pen with their questionnaire, and 725 did not receive a pen. A questionnaire was returned from 67.7% of the pen group and 64.7% of the group who did not receive a pen. There was no significant difference in return rates between the two groups (OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.43, p=0.22), nor level of completeness of the questionnaires (AMD -0.01, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.05, p=0.77). There was weak evidence of a reduction in the proportion of participants requiring a reminder and in time to response in the pen group. Conclusion: Inclusion of a pen with the follow-up postal questionnaire sent to participants in the SSHeW trial did not statistically significantly increase the response rate. These results add to the body of evidence around improving response rates in trials. Trial registration: ISRCTN 33051393 (for SSHEW). Registered on 14/03/2017. F1000 Research Limited 2020-06-09 /pmc/articles/PMC7941094/ /pubmed/33728040 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.23651.1 Text en Copyright: © 2020 Cunningham-Burley R et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Cunningham-Burley, Rachel Roche, Jenny Fairhurst, Caroline Cockayne, Sarah Hewitt, Catherine Iles-Smith, Heather Torgerson, David J. Enclosing a pen to improve response rate to postal questionnaire: an embedded randomised controlled trial |
title | Enclosing a pen to improve response rate to postal questionnaire: an embedded randomised controlled trial |
title_full | Enclosing a pen to improve response rate to postal questionnaire: an embedded randomised controlled trial |
title_fullStr | Enclosing a pen to improve response rate to postal questionnaire: an embedded randomised controlled trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Enclosing a pen to improve response rate to postal questionnaire: an embedded randomised controlled trial |
title_short | Enclosing a pen to improve response rate to postal questionnaire: an embedded randomised controlled trial |
title_sort | enclosing a pen to improve response rate to postal questionnaire: an embedded randomised controlled trial |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7941094/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33728040 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.23651.1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT cunninghamburleyrachel enclosingapentoimproveresponseratetopostalquestionnaireanembeddedrandomisedcontrolledtrial AT rochejenny enclosingapentoimproveresponseratetopostalquestionnaireanembeddedrandomisedcontrolledtrial AT fairhurstcaroline enclosingapentoimproveresponseratetopostalquestionnaireanembeddedrandomisedcontrolledtrial AT cockaynesarah enclosingapentoimproveresponseratetopostalquestionnaireanembeddedrandomisedcontrolledtrial AT hewittcatherine enclosingapentoimproveresponseratetopostalquestionnaireanembeddedrandomisedcontrolledtrial AT ilessmithheather enclosingapentoimproveresponseratetopostalquestionnaireanembeddedrandomisedcontrolledtrial AT torgersondavidj enclosingapentoimproveresponseratetopostalquestionnaireanembeddedrandomisedcontrolledtrial AT enclosingapentoimproveresponseratetopostalquestionnaireanembeddedrandomisedcontrolledtrial |