Getting physicians to open the survey: little evidence that an envelope teaser increases response rates

Abstract

BackgroundPhysician surveys are an important tool to assess attitudes, beliefs and self-reported behaviors of this policy relevant group. In order for a physician to respond to a mailed survey, they must first open the envelope. While there is some evidence that package elements can impact physician response rates, the impact of an envelope teaser is unknown. Here we assess this by testing the impact of adding a brightly colored "$25 incentive" sticker to the outside of an envelope on response rates and nonresponse bias in a survey of physicians.MethodsIn the second mailing of a survey assessing physicians' moral beliefs and views on controversial health care topics, initial nonrespondents were randomly assigned to receive a survey in an envelope with a colored "$25 incentive" sticker (teaser group) or an envelope without a sticker (control group). Response rates were compared between the teaser and control groups overall and by age, gender, region of the United States, specialty and years in practice. Nonresponse bias was assessed by comparing the demographic composition of the respondents to the nonrespondents in the experimental and control condition.ResultsNo significant differences in response rates were observed between the experimental and control conditions overall (p = 0.38) or after stratifying by age, gender, region, or practice type. Within the teaser condition, there was some variation in response rate by years since graduation. There was no independent effect of the teaser on response when simultaneously controlling for demographic characteristics (OR = 0.875, p = 0.4112).ConclusionsNeither response rates nor nonresponse bias were impacted by the use of an envelope teaser in a survey of physicians in the United States.

Ovarian Cancer Screening Practices of Obstetricians and Gynecologists in Puerto Rico

“…This study had the following limitations: a low response rate (25%), which may alter the results (selection bias) and limit that of being generalized to the entire population of obstetricians and gynecologists in PR. Nonetheless, our response rate of 25% was expected and is comparable to other mailed surveys in the US [ 26 , 27 ], where, in fact, it has been recommended that incentives be used to increase said rates [ 28 ]. In addition, other specialists (e.g., family physicians) who also are involved in preventive medicine were not included in the study.…”

Prospective evaluation of direct approach with a tablet device as a strategy to enhance survey study participant response rate

“…Factors known to impact on survey study response rates include survey length, appearance, pre-notification, inclusion of monetary or non-monetary incentives, academic sponsorship, and follow-up [9]. Beyond strategies previously demonstrated to improve survey study response rate, investigators may consider using other creative means to engage and recruit eligible participants [10,11]. In this paper we describe use of a tablet device to enhance participant response rate in a single center survey study involving a self-administered questionnaire.…”

The effect of a monetary incentive for administrative assistants on the survey response rate: a randomized controlled trial

“…Typically, the administrative assistants receive and screen survey requests, conveying those they deem to be of enough importance to the physician [ 3 , 11 , 30 ]. They potentially receive direct directives from the physician to refuse all survey requests, and thus act as the gatekeepers [ 3 ].…”