Trial reportJournal of public health dentistry2022
Randomized experiment on the effect of incentives and mailing strategy on response rates in a mail survey of dentists.
Trial report in Journal of public health dentistry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Randomized experiment on the effect of incentives and mailing strategy on response rates in a mail survey of dentists.Journal of public health dentistry · 2022Trial
- Swedish dentists' use of pharmacological pain management in children: a survey.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2025Article
- Participation Rates in 11 National Dental Practice-Based Research Network Surveys 2014-2022.Evaluation & the health professions · 2025Article
- Dentists' Information Needs and Opinions on Accessing Patient Information via Health Information Exchange: Survey Study.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
- Dentist-reported differences in services provided to patients with public vs. private dental insurance.BMC oral health · 2023Article
- Experiencing COVID-19, home isolation and primary health care: A mixed-methods study.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesResponse rates for mail surveys of dentists and other health care providers have declined appreciably over the past several decades. The objective of this study was to update evidence about the impact use of incentives and different mail strategies on response rates in a mail survey of dentists.
methodsWe randomized private practice dentists in Iowa (N = 1267) into six study groups to test the effects of incentives and mail strategy on response rate. Survey incentives included either a $2 bill or a customized pen/stylus; a control group with no incentive was included. Mail strategies included bulk mail or first-class stamps.
resultsThe overall survey response rate was 43%. A $2 bill incentive was associated with significantly higher likelihood of returning a survey compared to the control group with no incentive (48% response rate vs. 40%, respectively). A non-monetary incentive was not significantly associated with likelihood of response. Use of first-class stamps compared to bulk mail did not significantly affect response rate.
conclusionsThis study demonstrated the effectiveness of a $2 incentive to increase response rate in a mail survey of dentists. Given the background trend of declining survey participation rates, researchers should consider use of monetary incentives and explore new strategies to increase participation among dentists and other health care providers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.