Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36928697›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2023

Survey mode and nonresponse bias: A meta-analysis based on the data from the international social survey programme waves 1996-2018 and the European social survey rounds 1 to 9.

Adam Rybak

Full text readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

1 author.

Adam RybakFaculty of Sociology, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-3981-1081

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The constant increase in survey nonresponse and fieldwork costs are the reality of survey research. Together with other unpredictable events occurring in the world today, this increase poses a challenge: the necessity to accelerate a switch from face-to-face data collection to different modes, that have usually been considered to result in lower response rates. However, recent research has established that the simple response rate is a feeble measure of study quality. Therefore, this article aims to analyze the effect of survey characteristics, especially the survey mode, on the nonresponse bias. The bias measure used is the internal criteria first proposed by Sodeur and first applied by Kohler. The analysis is based on the survey documentation and results from the International Social Survey Programme waves 1996-2018 and the European Social Survey rounds 1 to 9. Random-effects three-level meta-regression models, based on data from countries from each inhabited continent, were created in order to estimate the impact of the survey mode or modes, sampling design, fieldwork experience, year of data collection, and response rate on the nonresponse bias indicator. Several ways of nesting observations within clusters were also proposed. The results suggest that using mail and some types of mixed-mode surveys were connected to lower nonresponse bias than using face-to-face mode surveys.

Indexed as

RecordsBiasCosts and Cost AnalysisData CollectionSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID36928697
PMCPMC10019664

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read13
identifiers read6
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.