Increasing Mail Questionnaire Response: A Four State Comparison

Dillman, Don A.; Christenson, James A.; Carpenter, Edwin H.; Brooks, Ralph M.

doi:10.2307/2094318

Cited by 172 publications

(82 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This result stands in sharp contrast to the findings of Dillman et al (1974) and House et a. (1977).…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

“…Explanations of the beneficial ffect of incentives and the ineffectiveness of certified mail are discussed. Dillman et al (1974) found that certified mail increased returns in a follow-up mailing and House et al (1977) showed that certified mail yields much higher returns than first class mail. Both studies involved follow-up mailings whereas the current report considered initial mailings to subjects.…”

Section: C~kmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Increasing response rates to mail questionnaires: Effects of incentives and certified mail

French¹,

Doehrman²

1980

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This result stands in sharp contrast to the findings of Dillman et al (1974) and House et a. (1977).…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Section: C~kmentioning

confidence: 97%

Increasing response rates to mail questionnaires: Effects of incentives and certified mail

French¹,

Doehrman²

1980

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…A modest incentive of a $5.00 coffee coupon was included in all surveys. In an adaptation of Dillman's methodology, 39 a second mailing was sent six weeks after the initial mailing to increase response rate. The second mailing also included a one page fact sheet summarising guidelines for referral for genetic cancer risk assessment to reinforce clinician learning.…”

Section: Measuring Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of a cancer genetics education programme on clinician knowledge and practice

Blazer

Grant²,

Sand³

et al. 2004

Journal of Medical Genetics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Many clinicians lack adequate knowledge about emerging standards of care related to genetic cancer risk assessment and the features of hereditary cancer needed to identify patients at risk. Objective: To determine how a clinical cancer genetics education programme for community based clinicians affected participant knowledge and changed clinical practice. Methods: The effects of the programme on participant knowledge and changes in clinical practice were measured through pre and post session knowledge questionnaires completed by 710 participants and practice impact surveys completed after one year by 69 out of 114 eligible annual conference participants sampled. Results: Respondents showed a 40% average increase in specific cancer genetics knowledge. Respondents to the post course survey reported that they used course information and materials to counsel and refer patients for hereditary cancer risk assessment (77%), shared course information with other clinicians (83%), and wanted additional cancer genetics education (80%). Conclusions: There was a significant immediate gain in cancer genetics knowledge among participants in a targeted outreach programme, and subset analysis indicated a positive long term effect on clinical practice. Clinician education that incorporates evidence based content and case based learning should lead to better identification and care of individuals with increased cancer risk.

show abstract

“…Both quantitative and qualitative data were gathered from a national sample of Canadian oncology nurses using the Dillman method for survey research (Dillman, Carpenter, Christenson, & Brooks, 1974). The Dillman method (described below) increases the response rate by reminding potential respondents about a study.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Self-help groups: Oncology nurses’ perspectives

Fitch¹,

Gray²,

Greenberg³

et al. 2001

CONJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During the past decade in North America, the number of selfhelp groups for cancer patients has grown dramatically. This is particularly the case for women with breast cancer and men with prostate cancer (Gray, Fitch, Davis, & Phillips, 1997a, 1997b. In Ontario alone, there are more than 60 self-help groups for women with breast cancer (Gray et al., 1997a). Many of these groups have grown as grassroots efforts in response to perceived inadequacies in the cancer care system, especially around issues of access to information and support. In many locations across Canada, the availability of self-help support groups provides an additional opportunity for cancer survivors to meet with peers on a regular basis. Self-help groups have been defined as "member-governed voluntary associations of persons who share a common problem, and who rely on experiential knowledge at least partly to mutually solve or cope with their common concerns" (Borkman, 1990, p.322). This definition specifically excludes groups run in any way by professionals, whether for support or psychoeducational purposes. From the self-help perspective, professionally-led or co-led groups, although operated with the same intention of providing support for cancer patients, are run using different models with different philosophies and practices (Wilson, 1993). These distinctions are often blurred within the ABRÉGÉ: GROUPES D'ENTRAIDE: PERSPECTIVES DES INFIRMIÈRES EN ONCOLOGIE

show abstract

Increasing Mail Questionnaire Response: A Four State Comparison

Cited by 172 publications

References 9 publications

Increasing response rates to mail questionnaires: Effects of incentives and certified mail

Increasing response rates to mail questionnaires: Effects of incentives and certified mail

Effects of a cancer genetics education programme on clinician knowledge and practice

Self-help groups: Oncology nurses’ perspectives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About