RESPONSE RATES, NONRESPONSE BIAS, AND DATA QUALITY: RESULTS FROM A NATIONAL SURVEY OF SENIOR HEALTHCARE LEADERS

Survey response rate is regarded as a key data-quality indicator, yet response rate is not necessarily predictive of nonresponse bias. Our study objective was to use a high-response-rate survey to assess non-response bias across successive waves. This survey of healthcare leaders utilized a web-base...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Public opinion quarterly 2015-04, Vol.79 (1), p.130-144
Hauptverfasser: METERKO, MARK, RESTUCCIA, JOSEPH D., STOLZMANN, KELLY, MOHR, DAVID, BRENNAN, CAITLIN, GLASGOW, JUSTIN, KABOLI, PETER
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 144
container_issue 1
container_start_page 130
container_title Public opinion quarterly
container_volume 79
creator METERKO, MARK
RESTUCCIA, JOSEPH D.
STOLZMANN, KELLY
MOHR, DAVID
BRENNAN, CAITLIN
GLASGOW, JUSTIN
KABOLI, PETER
description Survey response rate is regarded as a key data-quality indicator, yet response rate is not necessarily predictive of nonresponse bias. Our study objective was to use a high-response-rate survey to assess non-response bias across successive waves. This survey of healthcare leaders utilized a web-based, self-report format with an initial invitation and four nonrespondent follow-ups. Across five waves, comparisons were made for demographic and facility characteristics, proportion of items completed, and distribution of three question types: factual reports of customized categorical responses; single-item evaluations using five-point Likert scales; and multi-item scales, across four- or five-point Likert scales. The overall response rate was 95 percent (118/124); waves did not differ by demographic and facility characteristics or missing data. Across waves, there were no significant differences between responses to two factual report questions or the single- or multi-item scale measures of attitudes. According to a "what-if" analysis of cumulative results by wave, the same conclusions would have been reached if data collection had been halted at earlier points in time. Precision and statistical power increased as number of respondents accumulated by wave. The high response rate facilitated studying the impact of nonresponse bias by wave. Although high response rates are desirable because of precision and power, as survey fatigue increases, absolute thresholds representing "adequate" response rates may be less realistic. Results from "low" response-rate surveys should be considered on their merits, as they may accurately represent attitudes of the population. Therefore, low response rates should not be cited as reasons to dismiss results as uninformative.
doi_str_mv 10.1093/poq/nfu052
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1655315088</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>24546361</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>24546361</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-j205t-5da16368c460fbae3010439341d015e5b7c08851576bd9d502be7e9b5cfd60653</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9jUFLw0AUhBdRsFYv3oUFr8a-zeZtGm9ru7WBmNXsRuwpJE0CBm3apD303xuoOJeB4ZsZQm4ZPDII-GTb7iab-gDonpERQ-47yDk7JyMAzh0u3M9LctX3DQxyPXdE2kSZNx0bRRNplXmgsY7_o-dQDomM53QuraTvqYxCu3qiA5BG1tBFol-ppLG0oY5lRE2afKgV1QtqVBzqhC6VjOxyJhNFIyXnKjHX5KLOv_vq5s_HJF0oO1s6kX4JZzJyGhdw72CZM8HFdO0JqIu84sDA4wH3WAkMKyz8NUynyNAXRRmUCG5R-VVQ4LouBQjkY3J_2t127e5Q9fusaQ_dZrjMmEDkDIf-QN2dqKbft1227b5-8u6YuR56wzvjv6RPWlU</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1655315088</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>RESPONSE RATES, NONRESPONSE BIAS, AND DATA QUALITY: RESULTS FROM A NATIONAL SURVEY OF SENIOR HEALTHCARE LEADERS</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>Political Science Complete</source><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>Business Source Complete</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><creator>METERKO, MARK ; RESTUCCIA, JOSEPH D. ; STOLZMANN, KELLY ; MOHR, DAVID ; BRENNAN, CAITLIN ; GLASGOW, JUSTIN ; KABOLI, PETER</creator><creatorcontrib>METERKO, MARK ; RESTUCCIA, JOSEPH D. ; STOLZMANN, KELLY ; MOHR, DAVID ; BRENNAN, CAITLIN ; GLASGOW, JUSTIN ; KABOLI, PETER</creatorcontrib><description>Survey response rate is regarded as a key data-quality indicator, yet response rate is not necessarily predictive of nonresponse bias. Our study objective was to use a high-response-rate survey to assess non-response bias across successive waves. This survey of healthcare leaders utilized a web-based, self-report format with an initial invitation and four nonrespondent follow-ups. Across five waves, comparisons were made for demographic and facility characteristics, proportion of items completed, and distribution of three question types: factual reports of customized categorical responses; single-item evaluations using five-point Likert scales; and multi-item scales, across four- or five-point Likert scales. The overall response rate was 95 percent (118/124); waves did not differ by demographic and facility characteristics or missing data. Across waves, there were no significant differences between responses to two factual report questions or the single- or multi-item scale measures of attitudes. According to a "what-if" analysis of cumulative results by wave, the same conclusions would have been reached if data collection had been halted at earlier points in time. Precision and statistical power increased as number of respondents accumulated by wave. The high response rate facilitated studying the impact of nonresponse bias by wave. Although high response rates are desirable because of precision and power, as survey fatigue increases, absolute thresholds representing "adequate" response rates may be less realistic. Results from "low" response-rate surveys should be considered on their merits, as they may accurately represent attitudes of the population. Therefore, low response rates should not be cited as reasons to dismiss results as uninformative.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0033-362X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1537-5331</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/poq/nfu052</identifier><identifier>CODEN: POPQAE</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Attitude surveys ; Bias ; Data collection ; Demographics ; Response rates ; Studies</subject><ispartof>Public opinion quarterly, 2015-04, Vol.79 (1), p.130-144</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2015 American Association for Public Opinion Research</rights><rights>Copyright Oxford Publishing Limited(England) Spring 2015</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/24546361$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/24546361$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,27901,27902,33751,57992,58225</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>METERKO, MARK</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>RESTUCCIA, JOSEPH D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>STOLZMANN, KELLY</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MOHR, DAVID</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BRENNAN, CAITLIN</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>GLASGOW, JUSTIN</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>KABOLI, PETER</creatorcontrib><title>RESPONSE RATES, NONRESPONSE BIAS, AND DATA QUALITY: RESULTS FROM A NATIONAL SURVEY OF SENIOR HEALTHCARE LEADERS</title><title>Public opinion quarterly</title><description>Survey response rate is regarded as a key data-quality indicator, yet response rate is not necessarily predictive of nonresponse bias. Our study objective was to use a high-response-rate survey to assess non-response bias across successive waves. This survey of healthcare leaders utilized a web-based, self-report format with an initial invitation and four nonrespondent follow-ups. Across five waves, comparisons were made for demographic and facility characteristics, proportion of items completed, and distribution of three question types: factual reports of customized categorical responses; single-item evaluations using five-point Likert scales; and multi-item scales, across four- or five-point Likert scales. The overall response rate was 95 percent (118/124); waves did not differ by demographic and facility characteristics or missing data. Across waves, there were no significant differences between responses to two factual report questions or the single- or multi-item scale measures of attitudes. According to a "what-if" analysis of cumulative results by wave, the same conclusions would have been reached if data collection had been halted at earlier points in time. Precision and statistical power increased as number of respondents accumulated by wave. The high response rate facilitated studying the impact of nonresponse bias by wave. Although high response rates are desirable because of precision and power, as survey fatigue increases, absolute thresholds representing "adequate" response rates may be less realistic. Results from "low" response-rate surveys should be considered on their merits, as they may accurately represent attitudes of the population. Therefore, low response rates should not be cited as reasons to dismiss results as uninformative.</description><subject>Attitude surveys</subject><subject>Bias</subject><subject>Data collection</subject><subject>Demographics</subject><subject>Response rates</subject><subject>Studies</subject><issn>0033-362X</issn><issn>1537-5331</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><recordid>eNo9jUFLw0AUhBdRsFYv3oUFr8a-zeZtGm9ru7WBmNXsRuwpJE0CBm3apD303xuoOJeB4ZsZQm4ZPDII-GTb7iab-gDonpERQ-47yDk7JyMAzh0u3M9LctX3DQxyPXdE2kSZNx0bRRNplXmgsY7_o-dQDomM53QuraTvqYxCu3qiA5BG1tBFol-ppLG0oY5lRE2afKgV1QtqVBzqhC6VjOxyJhNFIyXnKjHX5KLOv_vq5s_HJF0oO1s6kX4JZzJyGhdw72CZM8HFdO0JqIu84sDA4wH3WAkMKyz8NUynyNAXRRmUCG5R-VVQ4LouBQjkY3J_2t127e5Q9fusaQ_dZrjMmEDkDIf-QN2dqKbft1227b5-8u6YuR56wzvjv6RPWlU</recordid><startdate>20150401</startdate><enddate>20150401</enddate><creator>METERKO, MARK</creator><creator>RESTUCCIA, JOSEPH D.</creator><creator>STOLZMANN, KELLY</creator><creator>MOHR, DAVID</creator><creator>BRENNAN, CAITLIN</creator><creator>GLASGOW, JUSTIN</creator><creator>KABOLI, PETER</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><general>Oxford Publishing Limited (England)</general><scope>7U4</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>WZK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20150401</creationdate><title>RESPONSE RATES, NONRESPONSE BIAS, AND DATA QUALITY: RESULTS FROM A NATIONAL SURVEY OF SENIOR HEALTHCARE LEADERS</title><author>METERKO, MARK ; RESTUCCIA, JOSEPH D. ; STOLZMANN, KELLY ; MOHR, DAVID ; BRENNAN, CAITLIN ; GLASGOW, JUSTIN ; KABOLI, PETER</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-j205t-5da16368c460fbae3010439341d015e5b7c08851576bd9d502be7e9b5cfd60653</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Attitude surveys</topic><topic>Bias</topic><topic>Data collection</topic><topic>Demographics</topic><topic>Response rates</topic><topic>Studies</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>METERKO, MARK</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>RESTUCCIA, JOSEPH D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>STOLZMANN, KELLY</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MOHR, DAVID</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BRENNAN, CAITLIN</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>GLASGOW, JUSTIN</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>KABOLI, PETER</creatorcontrib><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>Public opinion quarterly</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>METERKO, MARK</au><au>RESTUCCIA, JOSEPH D.</au><au>STOLZMANN, KELLY</au><au>MOHR, DAVID</au><au>BRENNAN, CAITLIN</au><au>GLASGOW, JUSTIN</au><au>KABOLI, PETER</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>RESPONSE RATES, NONRESPONSE BIAS, AND DATA QUALITY: RESULTS FROM A NATIONAL SURVEY OF SENIOR HEALTHCARE LEADERS</atitle><jtitle>Public opinion quarterly</jtitle><date>2015-04-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>79</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>130</spage><epage>144</epage><pages>130-144</pages><issn>0033-362X</issn><eissn>1537-5331</eissn><coden>POPQAE</coden><abstract>Survey response rate is regarded as a key data-quality indicator, yet response rate is not necessarily predictive of nonresponse bias. Our study objective was to use a high-response-rate survey to assess non-response bias across successive waves. This survey of healthcare leaders utilized a web-based, self-report format with an initial invitation and four nonrespondent follow-ups. Across five waves, comparisons were made for demographic and facility characteristics, proportion of items completed, and distribution of three question types: factual reports of customized categorical responses; single-item evaluations using five-point Likert scales; and multi-item scales, across four- or five-point Likert scales. The overall response rate was 95 percent (118/124); waves did not differ by demographic and facility characteristics or missing data. Across waves, there were no significant differences between responses to two factual report questions or the single- or multi-item scale measures of attitudes. According to a "what-if" analysis of cumulative results by wave, the same conclusions would have been reached if data collection had been halted at earlier points in time. Precision and statistical power increased as number of respondents accumulated by wave. The high response rate facilitated studying the impact of nonresponse bias by wave. Although high response rates are desirable because of precision and power, as survey fatigue increases, absolute thresholds representing "adequate" response rates may be less realistic. Results from "low" response-rate surveys should be considered on their merits, as they may accurately represent attitudes of the population. Therefore, low response rates should not be cited as reasons to dismiss results as uninformative.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><doi>10.1093/poq/nfu052</doi><tpages>15</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0033-362X
ispartof Public opinion quarterly, 2015-04, Vol.79 (1), p.130-144
issn 0033-362X
1537-5331
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_1655315088
source Jstor Complete Legacy; Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); Political Science Complete; Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; Business Source Complete; Alma/SFX Local Collection; Sociological Abstracts
subjects Attitude surveys
Bias
Data collection
Demographics
Response rates
Studies
title RESPONSE RATES, NONRESPONSE BIAS, AND DATA QUALITY: RESULTS FROM A NATIONAL SURVEY OF SENIOR HEALTHCARE LEADERS
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-13T15%3A21%3A25IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=RESPONSE%20RATES,%20NONRESPONSE%20BIAS,%20AND%20DATA%20QUALITY:%20RESULTS%20FROM%20A%20NATIONAL%20SURVEY%20OF%20SENIOR%20HEALTHCARE%20LEADERS&rft.jtitle=Public%20opinion%20quarterly&rft.au=METERKO,%20MARK&rft.date=2015-04-01&rft.volume=79&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=130&rft.epage=144&rft.pages=130-144&rft.issn=0033-362X&rft.eissn=1537-5331&rft.coden=POPQAE&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/poq/nfu052&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E24546361%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1655315088&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=24546361&rfr_iscdi=true