Portuguese Primary Care physicians response rate in surveys: A systematic review
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2018 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online) |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-42302018000300272 |
Resumo: | Summary Introduction: Surveys are a useful tool in primary care. However, low response rates can introduce selection bias, impairing both external and internal validity. The aim of this study was to assess the average response rate in surveys with Portuguese general practitioners (GPs). Method: We searched the Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, PsychInfo, SciELO, IndexRMP, RCAAP, Revista Portuguesa de Medicina Geral e Familiar, Acta Médica Portuguesa and the proceedings of conferences of general practice from incepton to December 2016. We included all postal, e-mail, telephone and personal surveys to primary care physicians without language restrictions. We did not assess risk of bias of included studies, since the main outcome was survey response rate. We performed planned subgroup analyses of the use of monetary incentives, the use of non-monetary incentives, survey delivery modes and prior contact with participants. Results: A total of 1,094 papers were identified and 37 studies were included in this review. The response rate in surveys done to Portuguese GPs was 56% (95CI 47-64%). There was substantial heterogeneity among included studies (I2=99%), but subgroup analysis did not explain this heterogeneity. Conclusion: Consistent with other published studies, the average response rate in surveys done with Portuguese GPs was 56%, with substantial variation among studies. Use of monetary incentives, one of the most effective strategies to increase response rates, was not present in any of the included studies. |
id |
AMB-1_d3fabcd3abd84e76e7ebd90cda0b2b6d |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S0104-42302018000300272 |
network_acronym_str |
AMB-1 |
network_name_str |
Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Portuguese Primary Care physicians response rate in surveys: A systematic reviewPhysiciansFamily PracticePrimary Health CareSurveys and QuestionnairesPortugalSummary Introduction: Surveys are a useful tool in primary care. However, low response rates can introduce selection bias, impairing both external and internal validity. The aim of this study was to assess the average response rate in surveys with Portuguese general practitioners (GPs). Method: We searched the Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, PsychInfo, SciELO, IndexRMP, RCAAP, Revista Portuguesa de Medicina Geral e Familiar, Acta Médica Portuguesa and the proceedings of conferences of general practice from incepton to December 2016. We included all postal, e-mail, telephone and personal surveys to primary care physicians without language restrictions. We did not assess risk of bias of included studies, since the main outcome was survey response rate. We performed planned subgroup analyses of the use of monetary incentives, the use of non-monetary incentives, survey delivery modes and prior contact with participants. Results: A total of 1,094 papers were identified and 37 studies were included in this review. The response rate in surveys done to Portuguese GPs was 56% (95CI 47-64%). There was substantial heterogeneity among included studies (I2=99%), but subgroup analysis did not explain this heterogeneity. Conclusion: Consistent with other published studies, the average response rate in surveys done with Portuguese GPs was 56%, with substantial variation among studies. Use of monetary incentives, one of the most effective strategies to increase response rates, was not present in any of the included studies.Associação Médica Brasileira2018-03-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-42302018000300272Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira v.64 n.3 2018reponame:Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online)instname:Associação Médica Brasileira (AMB)instacron:AMB10.1590/1806-9282.64.03.272info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessBasílio,NunoCardoso,SaraNunes,José MendesLaranjo,LilianaAntunes,Maria da LuzHeleno,Brunoeng2018-03-29T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0104-42302018000300272Revistahttps://ramb.amb.org.br/ultimas-edicoes/#https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||ramb@amb.org.br1806-92820104-4230opendoar:2018-03-29T00:00Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online) - Associação Médica Brasileira (AMB)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Portuguese Primary Care physicians response rate in surveys: A systematic review |
title |
Portuguese Primary Care physicians response rate in surveys: A systematic review |
spellingShingle |
Portuguese Primary Care physicians response rate in surveys: A systematic review Basílio,Nuno Physicians Family Practice Primary Health Care Surveys and Questionnaires Portugal |
title_short |
Portuguese Primary Care physicians response rate in surveys: A systematic review |
title_full |
Portuguese Primary Care physicians response rate in surveys: A systematic review |
title_fullStr |
Portuguese Primary Care physicians response rate in surveys: A systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed |
Portuguese Primary Care physicians response rate in surveys: A systematic review |
title_sort |
Portuguese Primary Care physicians response rate in surveys: A systematic review |
author |
Basílio,Nuno |
author_facet |
Basílio,Nuno Cardoso,Sara Nunes,José Mendes Laranjo,Liliana Antunes,Maria da Luz Heleno,Bruno |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Cardoso,Sara Nunes,José Mendes Laranjo,Liliana Antunes,Maria da Luz Heleno,Bruno |
author2_role |
author author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Basílio,Nuno Cardoso,Sara Nunes,José Mendes Laranjo,Liliana Antunes,Maria da Luz Heleno,Bruno |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Physicians Family Practice Primary Health Care Surveys and Questionnaires Portugal |
topic |
Physicians Family Practice Primary Health Care Surveys and Questionnaires Portugal |
description |
Summary Introduction: Surveys are a useful tool in primary care. However, low response rates can introduce selection bias, impairing both external and internal validity. The aim of this study was to assess the average response rate in surveys with Portuguese general practitioners (GPs). Method: We searched the Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, PsychInfo, SciELO, IndexRMP, RCAAP, Revista Portuguesa de Medicina Geral e Familiar, Acta Médica Portuguesa and the proceedings of conferences of general practice from incepton to December 2016. We included all postal, e-mail, telephone and personal surveys to primary care physicians without language restrictions. We did not assess risk of bias of included studies, since the main outcome was survey response rate. We performed planned subgroup analyses of the use of monetary incentives, the use of non-monetary incentives, survey delivery modes and prior contact with participants. Results: A total of 1,094 papers were identified and 37 studies were included in this review. The response rate in surveys done to Portuguese GPs was 56% (95CI 47-64%). There was substantial heterogeneity among included studies (I2=99%), but subgroup analysis did not explain this heterogeneity. Conclusion: Consistent with other published studies, the average response rate in surveys done with Portuguese GPs was 56%, with substantial variation among studies. Use of monetary incentives, one of the most effective strategies to increase response rates, was not present in any of the included studies. |
publishDate |
2018 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2018-03-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-42302018000300272 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-42302018000300272 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1590/1806-9282.64.03.272 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Associação Médica Brasileira |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Associação Médica Brasileira |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira v.64 n.3 2018 reponame:Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online) instname:Associação Médica Brasileira (AMB) instacron:AMB |
instname_str |
Associação Médica Brasileira (AMB) |
instacron_str |
AMB |
institution |
AMB |
reponame_str |
Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online) |
collection |
Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online) - Associação Médica Brasileira (AMB) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
||ramb@amb.org.br |
_version_ |
1754212833339375616 |