TY - JOUR
T1 - Demographic and occupational predictors of early response to a mailed invitation to enroll in a longitudinal health study
AU - Chretien, Jean Paul
AU - Chu, Laura K.
AU - Smith, Tyler C.
AU - Smith, Besa
AU - Ryan, Margaret A.K.
AU - Wells, Timothy S.
AU - Riddle, James R.
AU - Gray, Gregory C.
AU - Hooper, Tomoko
AU - Gackstetter, Gary D.
AU - Boyko, Edward J.
AU - Amoroso, Paul
PY - 2007
Y1 - 2007
N2 - Background. Often in survey research, subsets of the population invited to complete the survey do not respond in a timely manner and valuable resources are expended in recontact efforts. Various methods of improving response have been offered, such as reducing questionnaire length, offering incentives, and utilizing reminders; however, these methods can be costly. Utilizing characteristics of early responders (refusal or consent) in enrollment and recontact efforts may be a unique and cost-effective approach for improving the quality of epidemiologic research. Methods. To better understand early responders of any kind, we compared the characteristics of individuals who explicitly refused, consented, or did not respond within 2 months from the start of enrollment into a large cohort study of US military personnel. A multivariate polychotomous logistic regression model was used to estimate the effect of each covariate on the odds of early refusal and on the odds of early consent versus late/non-response, while simultaneously adjusting for all other variables in the model. Results. From regression analyses, we found many similarities between early refusers and early consenters. Factors associated with both early refusal and early consent included older age, higher education, White race/ethnicity, Reserve/Guard affiliation, and certain information technology and support occupations. Conclusion. These data suggest that early refusers may differ from late/non-responders, and that certain characteristics are associated with both early refusal and early consent to participate. Structured recruitment efforts that utilize these differences may achieve early response, thereby reducing mail costs and the use of valuable resources in subsequent contact efforts.
AB - Background. Often in survey research, subsets of the population invited to complete the survey do not respond in a timely manner and valuable resources are expended in recontact efforts. Various methods of improving response have been offered, such as reducing questionnaire length, offering incentives, and utilizing reminders; however, these methods can be costly. Utilizing characteristics of early responders (refusal or consent) in enrollment and recontact efforts may be a unique and cost-effective approach for improving the quality of epidemiologic research. Methods. To better understand early responders of any kind, we compared the characteristics of individuals who explicitly refused, consented, or did not respond within 2 months from the start of enrollment into a large cohort study of US military personnel. A multivariate polychotomous logistic regression model was used to estimate the effect of each covariate on the odds of early refusal and on the odds of early consent versus late/non-response, while simultaneously adjusting for all other variables in the model. Results. From regression analyses, we found many similarities between early refusers and early consenters. Factors associated with both early refusal and early consent included older age, higher education, White race/ethnicity, Reserve/Guard affiliation, and certain information technology and support occupations. Conclusion. These data suggest that early refusers may differ from late/non-responders, and that certain characteristics are associated with both early refusal and early consent to participate. Structured recruitment efforts that utilize these differences may achieve early response, thereby reducing mail costs and the use of valuable resources in subsequent contact efforts.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33846881571&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33846881571&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1186/1471-2288-7-6
DO - 10.1186/1471-2288-7-6
M3 - Article
C2 - 17397558
AN - SCOPUS:33846881571
SN - 1471-2288
VL - 7
JO - BMC Medical Research Methodology
JF - BMC Medical Research Methodology
M1 - 6
ER -