Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15663710›Full record

ArticleHealth services research2005

Response rates and response bias for 50 surveys of pediatricians.

William L Cull, Karen G O'Connor, Sanford Sharp, Suk-fong S Tang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health services research, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 158 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
158citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

158 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

98 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

William L CullDivision of Health Policy Research, American Academy of Pediatrics, Elk Grove Village, IL 60007, USA.
Karen G O'Connor
Sanford Sharp
Suk-fong S Tang

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

RESEARCH

objectiveTo track response rates across time for surveys of pediatricians, to explore whether response bias is present for these surveys, and to examine whether response bias increases with lower response rates. DATA SOURCE/STUDY

settingA total of 63,473 cases were gathered from 50 different surveys of pediatricians conducted by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) since 1994. Thirty-one surveys targeted active U.S. members of the AAP, six targeted pediatric residents, and the remaining 13 targeted AAP-member and nonmember pediatric subspecialists. Information for the full target samples, including nonrespondents, was collected using administrative databases of the AAP and the American Board of Pediatrics. STUDY

designTo assess bias for each survey, age, gender, location, and AAP membership type were compared for respondents and the full target sample. Correlational analyses were conducted to examine whether surveys with lower response rates had increasing levels of response bias. PRINCIPAL

findingsResponse rates to the 50 surveys examined declined significantly across survey years (1994-2002). Response rates ranged from 52 to 81 percent with an average of 68 percent. Comparisons between respondents and the full target samples showed the respondent group to be younger, to have more females, and to have less specialty-fellow members. Response bias was not apparent for pediatricians' geographical location. The average response bias, however, was fairly small for all factors: age (0.45 years younger), gender (1.4 percentage points more females), and membership type (1.1 percentage points fewer specialty-fellow members). Gender response bias was found to be inversely associated with survey response rates (r=-0.38). Even for the surveys with the lowest response rates, amount of response bias never exceeded 5 percentage points for gender, 3 years for age, or 3 percent for membership type.

conclusionsWhile response biases favoring women, young physicians, and nonspecialty-fellow members were found across the 52-81 percent response rates examined in this study, the amount of bias was minimal for these factors that could be tested. At least for surveys of pediatricians, more attention should be devoted by investigators to assessments of response bias rather than relying on response rates as a proxy of response bias.

Indexed as

AdultFemaleHealth Care SurveysHumansMaleMiddle AgedPediatricsSelection BiasSocieties, MedicalSpecialties, SurgicalUnited States

Identifiers

PMID15663710
PMCPMC1361134

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.