Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Evaluation Review
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Parsons, J. A.
Right arrow Articles by Kaluzny, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Parsons, J. A.
Right arrow Articles by Kaluzny, A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

Factors Associated With Response Rates in a National Survey of Primary Care Physicians

Jennifer A. Parsons

University of Illinois at Chicago

Richard B. Warnecke

University of Illinois at Chicago

Ronald F. Czaja

North Carolina State University

Janet Barnsley

University of Toronto

Arnold Kaluzny

University of North Carolina

This article addresses the results and implications of offering a national sample of primary care physicians an option to complete a questionnaire by mail or phone. An overall cooperation rate of 62.7% was achieved; 55% of the interviews were completed via telephone. Noticeable differences in rate of cooperation and mode preference were observed across the four physician specialties surveyed. The importance of a lengthy field period, due to differences between early and late responders on variables important to the study, is also demonstrated.

Evaluation Review, Vol. 18, No. 6, 756-766 (1994)
DOI: 10.1177/0193841X9401800607
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Eval Health ProfHome page
J. B. VanGeest, T. P. Johnson, and V. L. Welch
Methodologies for Improving Response Rates in Surveys of Physicians: A Systematic Review
Eval Health Prof, December 1, 2007; 30(4): 303 - 321.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 West J Nurs ResHome page
C. A. Hill, K. Fahrney, S. C. Wheeless, and C. P. Carson
Survey Response Inducements for Registered Nurses
West J Nurs Res, April 1, 2006; 28(3): 322 - 334.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Fam PractHome page
A P. Williams, J. Barnsley, E. Vayda, J. Kaczorowski, T. Ostbye, and E. Wenghofer
Comparing the characteristics and attitudes of physicians in different primary care settings: The Ontario Walk-in Clinic Study
Fam. Pract., December 1, 2002; 19(6): 647 - 657.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Med Care Res RevHome page
J. B. VanGeest, M. K. Wynia, D. S. Cummins, and I. B. Wilson
Measuring Deception: Test-Retest Reliability of Physicians' Self-Reported Manipulation of Reimbursement Rules for Patients
Med Care Res Rev, June 1, 2002; 59(2): 184 - 196.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Work and OccupationsHome page
R. C. BARNETT and K. C. GAREIS
Reduced-Hours Employment: The Relationship Between Difficulty of Trade-Offs and Quality of Life
Work and Occupations, May 1, 2000; 27(2): 168 - 187.
[Abstract] [PDF]