ArticleJournal of survey statistics and methodology2023
An Experimental Evaluation of Two Approaches for Improving Response to Household Screening Efforts in National Mail/Web Surveys.
Article in Journal of survey statistics and methodology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Associations between survey completion mode and sociodemographic factors among individuals eligible for lung cancer screening.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025Article
- Article
- Toward a New Approach to Creating Population-Representative Data for Demographic Research.Demography · 2024Article
- What predicts willingness to participate in a follow-up panel study among respondents to a national web/mail survey?Field methods · 2024Article
- Incorporating Adaptive Survey Design in a Two-Stage National Web or Mail Mixed-Mode Survey: An Experiment in the American Family Health Study.Journal of survey statistics and methodology · 2024Article
- Visible Cash, a Second Incentive, and Priority Mail? An Experimental Evaluation of Mailing Strategies for a Screening Questionnaire in a National Push-to-Web/Mail Survey.Journal of survey statistics and methodology · 2023Article
- Methods for improving participation rates in national self-administered web/mail surveys: Evidence from the United States.PloS one · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Survey researchers have carefully modified their data collection operations for various reasons, including the rising costs of data collection and the ongoing Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, both of which have made in-person interviewing difficult. For large national surveys that require household (HH) screening to determine survey eligibility, cost-efficient screening methods that do not include in-person visits need additional evaluation and testing. A new study, known as the American Family Health Study (AFHS), recently initiated data collection with a national probability sample, using a sequential mixed-mode mail/web protocol for push-to-web US HH screening (targeting persons aged 18-49 years). To better understand optimal approaches for this type of national screening effort, we embedded two randomized experiments in the AFHS data collection. The first tested the use of bilingual respondent materials where mailed invitations to the screener were sent in both English and Spanish to 50 percent of addresses with a high predicted likelihood of having a Spanish speaker and 10 percent of all other addresses. We found that the bilingual approach did not increase the response rate of high-likelihood Spanish-speaking addresses, but consistent with prior work, it increased the proportion of eligible Hispanic respondents identified among completed screeners, especially among addresses predicted to have a high likelihood of having Spanish speakers. The second tested a form of nonresponse follow-up, where a subsample of active sampled HHs that had not yet responded to the screening invitations was sent a priority mailing with a $5 incentive, adding to the $2 incentive provided for all sampled HHs in the initial screening invitation. We found this approach to be quite valuable for increasing the screening survey response rate.
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.