Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32024488›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2020

Factors associated with health survey response among young employees: a register-based study using online, mailed and telephone interview data collection methods.

Tea Lallukka, Olli Pietiläinen, Sauli Jäppinen, Mikko Laaksonen, Jouni Lahti, Ossi Rahkonen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 77 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
77citing 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

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

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

17 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

6 authors.

Tea LallukkaDepartment of Public Health, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 20, 00014, Helsinki, Finland. tea.lallukka@helsinki.fi.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3841-3129
Olli PietiläinenDepartment of Public Health, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 20, 00014, Helsinki, Finland.
Sauli JäppinenDepartment of Public Health, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 20, 00014, Helsinki, Finland.
Mikko LaaksonenFinnish Centre for Pensions, Helsinki, Finland.
Jouni LahtiDepartment of Public Health, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 20, 00014, Helsinki, Finland.
Ossi RahkonenDepartment of Public Health, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 20, 00014, Helsinki, Finland.

Funding

Academy of Finland #1294514Academy of Finland #287488, #319200Finnish Work Environment Fund #117308
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDeclining response rates are a common challenge to epidemiological research. Response rates further are particularly low among young people. We thus aimed to identify factors associated with health survey response among young employees using different data collection methods.

methodsWe included fully register-based data to identify key socioeconomic, workplace and health-related factors associated with response to a health survey collected via online and mailed questionnaires. Additionally, telephone interviews were conducted for those who had not responded via online or to the mailed survey. The survey data collection was done in autumn 2017 among young employees of the City of Helsinki, Finland (18-39 years, target population n = 11,459).

resultsThe overall response to the survey was 51.5% (n = 5898). The overall findings suggest that differences in the distributions of socioeconomic, workplace and health-related factors between respondents in the online or mailed surveys, or telephone interviews, are relatively minor. Telephone interview respondents were of lower socioeconomic position, which helped improve representativeness of the entire cohort. Despite the general broad representativeness of the data, some socioeconomic and health-related factors contributed to response. Thus, non-respondents were more often men, manual workers, from the lowest income quartile, had part-time jobs, and had more long sickness absence spells. In turn, job contract (permanent or temporary) and employment sector did not affect survey response.

conclusionsDespite a general representativeness of data of the target population, socioeconomically more disadvantaged and those with long sickness absence, are slightly overrepresented among non-respondents. This suggests that when studying the associations between social factors and health, the associations can be weaker than if complete data were available representing all socioeconomic groups.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultCohort StudiesData CollectionEmploymentFemaleFinlandHealth SurveysHumansInternetMalePostal ServiceRegistriesSocioeconomic FactorsTelephoneYoung AdultHealth-related factorsMail surveyOnline surveyParticipationRegister linkagesResponseSocioeconomic factorsTelephone interviewWorkplaceYoung employees

Identifiers

PMID32024488
PMCPMC7003443

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.