Family Practice Advance Access published online on April 6, 2005
Family Practice, doi:10.1093/fampra/cmi022
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1 Department of General Practice, University of Goettingen, Germany
* To whom correspondence should be addressed. Background. Non-participation of General Practitioners (GPs) hampers primary care research. Using existing network structures can improve participation, but may introduce sampling effects. Objectives. To examine the role of network-based recruitment and other determinants of participation, and to estimate effects of sampling and non-participation on generalizability. Methods. For a study of quality of care assessment, we recruited GPs from a regionally defined population and a GP network. Effects of sampling and non-participation were analysed by comparing characteristics between participants, target samples, and reference data for all German GPs. Factors influencing study participation were assessed in multiple logistic regression. Results. Compared to the regional sample, network GPs were more likely to complete survey questionnaires (92% versus 69%) and to participate in the study (66% versus 23%). Compared to national reference data, study participants from both populations were younger, had a higher level of professional training, and included more men. These differences were already present in the network target sample, but were largely attributable to selective participation in the regional sample. Network membership remained the strongest determinant of participation in multiple logistic regression (odds ratio 5.01; 95% confidence interval 2.53-9.91). A younger age, higher professional training, and membership in the German Society of General Practice were also predictive of participation. Conclusions. Although network-based recruitment of GPs increases participation rates, sample effects are similar in size and direction as effects of non-participation in the regionally defined population. Careful analysis of participants based on publicly available data is therefore crucial for the assessment of generalizability.
Received October 30, 2004
Accepted December 30, 2004
Article
Participation in a quality of care study and consequences for generalizability of general practice research
2 QP-Quality Practices GmbH Bad Krozingen, University of Goettingen, Germany
3 Centre for Social Science Methodology, University of Goettingen, Germany
4 Teaching Unit for General Practice, University of Freiburg, Germany
5 Department of General Practice, University of Goettingen, Germany; Robert Koch Institute Berlin, Germany
Dirk Wetzel, E-mail: dwetzel{at}gwdg.de
Abstract 
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  J. M. Galliher, A. J. Bonham, L. M. Dickinson, E. W. Staton, and W. D. Pace Representativeness of PBRN Physician Practice Patterns and Related Beliefs: The Case of the AAFP National Research Network Ann. Fam. Med, November 1, 2009; 7(6): 547 - 554. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. Hummers-Pradier, C. Scheidt-Nave, H. Martin, S. Heinemann, M. M Kochen, and W. Himmel Simply no time? Barriers to GPs' participation in primary health care research Fam. Pract., April 15, 2008; (2008) cmn015v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [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]
|
|