Family Practice Vol. 12, No. 2, 227-231
© Oxford University Press 1995
research-article |
Reducing systematic bias in studies of general practitioners: the use of a medical peer in the recruitment of general practitioners in research
1Epidemiology and Health Information Branch, Queensland Health GPO Box 48, Brisbane, Q1d 4001, Australia
2North Queensland Clinical School, University of Queensland PO Box 1805, Townsville, Q1d 4810, Australia
3Hunter Centre for Health Advancement Locked Bag 10, Wallsend, NSW 2287, Australia
Address correspondence to Alison Heywood
Reducing systematic bias in any group of study participants should be a priority of any researcher. This can be achieved by ensuring the sampling framework is adequate and by increasing response rates. Response rates in studies of general practitioners have to date tended to be low. Generalization of results to the wider population of GPs is therefore reduced. This paper systematically examines those factors which can reduce bias, recognising accurate identification of the target population, gaining good access to respondents, and maximising response rates as crucial factors. The importance of a medical peer in recruitment is examined. Applying these factors to a study situation, three different recruitment strategies were tested. As the strategy improved, there was an incremental improvement in the response rate (44%, 67%, 78%). These results indicate that by specifically addressing strategies which facilitate access to the target population, and increase the legitimacy and credibility of the study, significant improvements in response rates can be achieved.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  F. Goodyear-Smith, D. York, H. Petousis-Harris, N. Turner, J. Copp, N. Kerse, and C. Grant Recruitment of practices in primary care research: the long and the short of it Fam. Pract., April 1, 2009; 26(2): 128 - 136. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. B. VanGeest, T. P. Johnson, and V. L. Welch Methodologies for Improving Response Rates in Surveys of Physicians: A Systematic Review Eval Health Prof, December 1, 2007; 30(4): 303 - 321. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. L. James, C. Fraser, K. Anderson, and F. Judd Use of research by the Australian health promotion workforce Health Educ. Res., August 1, 2007; 22(4): 576 - 587. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 G. Ewing, M. Rogers, S. Barclay, J. McCabe, A. Martin, and C. Todd Recruiting patients into a primary care based study of palliative care: why is it so difficult? Palliative Medicine, July 1, 2004; 18(5): 452 - 459. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. J. Huibers, G. Bleijenberg, A. J. Beurskens, I. Kant, J A. Knottnerus, D. A. van der Windt, E. Bazelmans, and C. P van Schayck An alternative trial design to overcome validity and recruitment problems in primary care research Fam. Pract., April 1, 2004; 21(2): 213 - 218. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R Foy, J Parry, A Duggan, B Delaney, S Wilson, N. Lewin-van den Broek, A Lassen, L Vickers, and P Myres How evidence based are recruitment strategies to randomized controlled trials in primary care? Experience from seven studies Fam. Pract., February 1, 2003; 20(1): 83 - 92. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Y. Lensing, S. R. Gillaspy, P. M. Simpson, S. M. Jones, J. M. James, and J. M. Smith Encouraging Physicians to Respond to Surveys through the Use of Fax Technology Eval Health Prof, September 1, 2000; 23(3): 348 - 359. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. Foy, J. Parry, and B. McAvoy Clinical trials in primary care BMJ, October 31, 1998; 317(7167): 1168 - 1169. [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. R McAvoy and E. F S Kaner General practice postal surveys: a questionnaire too far? BMJ, September 21, 1996; 313(7059): 732 - 733. [Full Text]
|
|