Effects of form length and item format on response patterns and estimates of physician office and hospital outpatient department visits. National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey and National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, 2001.

Q1 Mathematics
Esther Hing, Susan M Schappert, Catharine W Burt, Iris M Shimizu
{"title":"Effects of form length and item format on response patterns and estimates of physician office and hospital outpatient department visits. National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey and National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, 2001.","authors":"Esther Hing,&nbsp;Susan M Schappert,&nbsp;Catharine W Burt,&nbsp;Iris M Shimizu","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This report describes effects due to form length and/or item formats on respondent cooperation and survey estimates.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two formats were used for the Patient Record form for the 2001 NAMCS and OPD component of the NHAMCS: a short form with 70 subitems and a long form with 140 subitems. The short form also contained many write-in items and fit on a one-sided page. The long form contained more check boxes and other unique items and required a two-sided page. The NAMCS sample of physicians and NHAMCS sample of hospitals were randomly divided into two half samples and randomly assigned to either the short or long form. Unit and item nonresponse rates, as well as survey estimates from the two forms, were compared using SUDAAN software, which takes into account the complex sample design of the surveys.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Physician unit response was lower for the long form overall and in certain geographic regions. Overall OPD unit response was not affected by form length, although there were some differences in favor of the long form for some types of hospitals. Despite having twice the number of check boxes on the long form as the short form, there was no difference in the percentage of visits with any diagnostic or screening services ordered or provided. However, visit estimates were usually higher for services collected with long form check-boxes than with (recoded) short form write-in entries. Finally, the study confirmed the feasibility of collecting certain items found only on the long form.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Overall, physician cooperation was more sensitive to form length than was OPD cooperation. The quality of the data was not affected by form length. Visit estimates were influenced by both content and item format.</p>","PeriodicalId":23577,"journal":{"name":"Vital and health statistics. Series 2, Data evaluation and methods research","volume":" 139","pages":"1-32"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vital and health statistics. Series 2, Data evaluation and methods research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Mathematics","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: This report describes effects due to form length and/or item formats on respondent cooperation and survey estimates.

Methods: Two formats were used for the Patient Record form for the 2001 NAMCS and OPD component of the NHAMCS: a short form with 70 subitems and a long form with 140 subitems. The short form also contained many write-in items and fit on a one-sided page. The long form contained more check boxes and other unique items and required a two-sided page. The NAMCS sample of physicians and NHAMCS sample of hospitals were randomly divided into two half samples and randomly assigned to either the short or long form. Unit and item nonresponse rates, as well as survey estimates from the two forms, were compared using SUDAAN software, which takes into account the complex sample design of the surveys.

Results: Physician unit response was lower for the long form overall and in certain geographic regions. Overall OPD unit response was not affected by form length, although there were some differences in favor of the long form for some types of hospitals. Despite having twice the number of check boxes on the long form as the short form, there was no difference in the percentage of visits with any diagnostic or screening services ordered or provided. However, visit estimates were usually higher for services collected with long form check-boxes than with (recoded) short form write-in entries. Finally, the study confirmed the feasibility of collecting certain items found only on the long form.

Conclusion: Overall, physician cooperation was more sensitive to form length than was OPD cooperation. The quality of the data was not affected by form length. Visit estimates were influenced by both content and item format.

表格长度和项目格式对医生办公室和医院门诊部访问的反应模式和估计的影响。2001年全国门诊医疗调查和全国医院门诊医疗调查。
目的:本报告描述了由于表格长度和/或项目格式对受访者合作和调查估计的影响。方法:对2001年NAMCS和NHAMCS OPD部分的病历表采用两种格式:包含70个子项的短表格和包含140个子项的长表格。简短的形式也包含了许多填空的项目,适合在单面页。长表单包含更多的复选框和其他独特的项目,需要一个双面页。医师NAMCS样本和医院NHAMCS样本随机分为两半样本,随机分为短样本和长样本。使用SUDAAN软件比较了单位和项目无反应率,以及两种形式的调查估计,该软件考虑了调查的复杂样本设计。结果:总体而言,在某些地理区域,医生单位的反应较低。总体而言,OPD单位的反应不受表格长度的影响,尽管在某些类型的医院中存在一些有利于长表格的差异。尽管长表格上的复选框数量是短表格的两倍,但订购或提供任何诊断或筛查服务的访问百分比没有差异。然而,对于使用长形式复选框收集的服务,访问估计通常要高于使用(重新编码的)短形式写入条目收集的服务。最后,该研究证实了收集某些只在长表格上发现的项目的可行性。结论:总体而言,医师合作比门诊合作对表单长度更敏感。数据的质量不受表单长度的影响。访问估计受到内容和项目格式的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
13.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Studies of new statistical methodology including experimental tests of new survey methods, studies of vital statistics collection methods, new analytical techniques, objective evaluations of reliability of collected data, and contributions to statistical theory. Studies also include comparison of U.S. methodology with those of other countries.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信