ArticleEuropean journal of public health2025
The impact of reminders on representativeness and survey estimates among web-mode invited in the Danish National Health Survey.
Article in European journal of public health, 2025. 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.
- Factors Influencing Response Rates in National Internet-Based Questionnaires: Analysis of a Large National Survey.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2026Article
- Non-Communicable Disease, Metabolic and Lifestyle Risk Factor Profiles in South African University Students: A Latent Class Analysis.Public health challenges · 2026Article
- Article
- Association Between Dental Aesthetics and Psychosocial Well-Being: A Cross-Sectional Study Among Health Sciences Students in Yemen.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dentistry · 2026Article
- Estimation of factors associated with self-rated health among older adults living alone: A multilevel analysis of individual and regional determinants.Journal of Korean gerontological nursing · 2025Article
- Danish mothers of young children adhere less to international physical activity guidelines compared with mothers of older children.Preventive medicine reports · 2025Article
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
Declining response proportions in health surveys may lead to increased non-response bias. Multiple reminders are often used to increase response proportions, and, thus, we aimed to determine if the use of reminders decreased the magnitude of non-response bias among web-mode invited in the Danish National Health Survey 2023. In the Danish National Health Survey 2023, a national random sample of 23 467 individuals (aged ≥16 years) with residence in Denmark were invited by a secure electronic mail service. Invited individuals received up to five inquiries: (i) web invitation, (ii) web reminder, (iii) paper invitation including a questionnaire and a prepaid return envelope, (iv) paper reminder, and (v) paper reminder including a questionnaire and a prepaid return envelope. The cumulative response proportions after first-, second-, third-, fourth-, and fifth inquiries were 19.1%, 28.9%, 37.2%, 39.3%, and 42.0%, respectively. In general, third, fourth, and fifth mailing respondents were more often men, at younger ages, with non-Western backgrounds, and unmarried compared to first mailing respondents. Furthermore, third, fourth, and fifth mailing respondents were in general found to have less favorable health behavior than first mailing respondents, but also a lower prevalence of fair or poor self-rated health and long-standing health problems. In conlusion, reminders are an effective way to increase the response proportion. Furthermore, the use of reminders was found to decrease the magnitude of non-response bias; however, the decrease was small due to the low number of individuals responding after fourth and fifth inquiries.
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.