Landline and Cell Phone Response Measures in Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System

Abstract

Landline RDD surveys are facing a coverage problem due to increasing cell phone only households in the US. To address this issue, the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) included cell phone samples in 2009. BRFSS landline and cell phone data for 2009 were used to examine the differences between landline and cell phone data in several response measures, which included: response and cooperation rates, percent completed screening question, percent completed interview and percent refusal/break-off the interview. The completion rates and refusal/break-off rates are estimated overall and among those completed screening questions, for the total sample and by state. Cell phone samples were less likely to be answered than landline samples. The dispositions of cell phone calls were more likely to be noted as answering devices/ voicemail, no response or refusal/break-offs. Cell phone respondents were also less likely to complete screening questions. However, among respondents who completed screening questions, cell phone respondents were more likely to complete the survey and less likely to refuse or break-off, a pattern which was noted in the majority of states. Also, response and cooperation rates show different pictures in the landline and cell phone samples, where landlines had higher response rate than cell phones, and cell phones had higher cooperation rates than landlines. The results provide valuable information on the importance of pursuing better strategies to overcome barriers to higher completion of screening questions and success at the initial stage of the interview. Such effects could improve the overall response rate and under coverage bias in the landline.

Reply to Vale et al. Comment on “Zhong et al. Sugar-Sweetened and Diet Beverage Consumption in Philadelphia One Year after the Beverage Tax. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 1336”

“…The criteria for selecting the 515 participants as the final analytic sample were described in Figure S1. The loss of follow-up was expected to be high, and the attrition observed in our study was similar to other random-digit-dialing phone surveys [2,3]. We described the power calculation in the methods section and provided more details in the supplement (Figure S2).…”

Recruiting and retaining youth and young adults: challenges and opportunities in survey research for tobacco control

“…Studies that combine landline and cellphone frames have not resolved these problems given declining phone response rates 7 9. Such declines can be attributed to numerous factors, including the broad penetration of caller identification and voicemail 10. These factors serve to significantly reduce the probability of reaching potential respondents, and in turn, increase labour costs associated with data collection 11.…”

Comparison response patterns on landline and cell phone in a call back survey: effects of demographic characteristics and lag days

“…A comparison of the BRFSS landline and cell phone response measures showed that landline surveys have higher response rates than cell phone surveys, but cell phone respondents show higher cooperation rates (Qayad et al 2013). A study based on the National Flu Survey showed that maximized respondent contact and completed interviews might not be the most cost-effective for cell phone surveys (Reimer et al 2012).…”