17 research outputs found

    Accuracy of responses from postal surveys about continuing medical education and information behavior: experiences from a survey among German diabetologists

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Postal surveys are a popular instrument for studies about continuing medical education habits. But little is known about the accuracy of responses in such surveys. The objective of this study was to quantify the magnitude of inaccurate responses in a postal survey among physicians. METHODS: A sub-analysis of a questionnaire about continuing medical education habits and information management was performed. The five variables used for the quantitative analysis are based on a question about the knowledge of a fictitious technical term and on inconsistencies in contingency tables of answers to logically connected questions. RESULTS: Response rate was 52%. Non-response bias is possible but seems not very likely since an association between demographic variables and inconsistent responses could not be found. About 10% of responses were inaccurate according to the definition. CONCLUSION: It was shown that a sub-analysis of a questionnaire makes a quantification of inaccurate responses in postal surveys possible. This sub-analysis revealed that a notable portion of responses in a postal survey about continuing medical education habits and information management was inaccurate

    Can obtaining informed consent alter self-reported drinking behaviour? A methodological experiment.

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Informed consent is the foundation of the ethical conduct of health research. Obtaining informed consent may unwittingly interfere with the data collected in research studies, particularly if they concern sensitive behaviours that participants are requested to report on. To address gaps in evidence on such research participation effects, we conducted a methodological experiment evaluating the impact of the informed consent procedure on participants' reporting behaviour, specifically on their self-report of drinking behaviour as measured by Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test (AUDIT). METHODS: A two arm double blinded randomised controlled trial was used. University students present in London student unions at the time of recruitment were contacted in two phases (an initial run-in phase followed by the main phase). Those providing positive responses to verbal questions: 1) "are you a student?"; 2) "do you drink alcohol?"; 3) "would you like to take part in a brief health survey, which will take around 5 minutes?" were recruited. Participants received one of the two envelopes by chance, with the sequence generated by an online random sequence generator. One contained the participant information sheet, informed consent form and the AUDIT questionnaire (the intervention group), while the other contained only the AUDIT questionnaire (the comparator group). The primary outcome was the mean AUDIT score, which ranges from 0 to 40. The secondary outcome was the proportion of participants in each group scoring 8 or more on the AUDIT, the threshold score for hazardous and harmful drinking warranting intervention. RESULTS: A total of 380 participants were successfully recruited, resulting in 190 participants in each group, of which 378 were included in the final analysis. There is no evidence of any statistically significant difference between groups in the primary outcome. A statistically significant difference in the secondary outcome was found in the run-in phase only, and not in the main phase, or overall. Moreover, between-group outcome differences between the two phases suggest an important influence of setting on reporting behaviour. CONCLUSIONS: There is no strong evidence that completion of informed consent itself alters self-reporting behaviour with regards to alcohol, though the effect of settings needs to be further studied

    Same-sex sexual behaviour: US frequency estimates from survey data with simultaneous misreporting and non-response

    No full text
    Survey-based research concerning sexual behaviour almost inevitably confronts the simultaneous problems of misreporting and non-response. These problems lead to disparities among estimates of the number and characteristics of those who engage in same-sex sexual behaviour. This paper proposes a statistical model to consistently estimate the frequency of same-sex sexual behaviour in the presence of non-ignorable misreporting and non-response. The model is fitted using 1991–2000 General Social Survey data. Frequency estimates corrected for simultaneous misreporting and non-response are reported. According to the model, 7.1% of US males and 4.1% of females – 15.8 million individuals – are not exclusively heterosexual. Allowing for misreporting and non-response increases the estimated same-sex frequency by more than four million. The model reveals new patterns between misreporting and non-response probabilities and standard demographic variables such as age and income.

    Effect of Training on Primary Care Residents’ Performance in Brief Alcohol Intervention: A Randomized Controlled Trial

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Brief alcohol interventions (BAI) reduce alcohol use and related problems in primary care patients with hazardous drinking behavior. The effectiveness of teaching BAI on the performance of primary care residents has not been fully evaluated. METHODS: A cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted with 26 primary care residents who were randomized to either an 8-hour, interactive BAI training workshop (intervention) or a lipid management workshop (control). During the 6-month period after training (i.e., from October 1, 2003 to March 30, 2004), 506 hazardous drinkers were identified in primary care, 260 of whom were included in the study. Patients were interviewed immediately and then 3 months after meeting with each resident to evaluate their perceptions of the BAI experience and to document drinking patterns. RESULTS: Patients reported that BAI trained residents: conducted more components of BAI than did controls (2.4 vs 1.5, p = .001); were more likely to explain safe drinking limits (27% vs 10%, p = .001) and provide feedback on patients' alcohol use (33% vs 21%, p = .03); and more often sought patient opinions on drinking limits (19% vs 6%, p = .02). No between-group differences were observed in patient drinking patterns or in use of 9 of the 12 BAI components. CONCLUSIONS: The BAI-trained residents did not put a majority of BAI components into practice, thus it is difficult to evaluate the influence of BAI on the reduction of alcohol use among hazardous drinkers
    corecore