IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/evarev/v19y1995i4p436-450.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Maximizing Response to Surveys in Health Program Evaluation At Minimum Cost Using Multiple Methods

Author

Listed:
  • Neil Atherton Day

    (University of Melbourne)

  • David R. Dunt

    (University of Melbourne)

  • Susan Day

    (University of Melbourne)

Abstract

This article shows how the use of multiple methods of follow-up can enhance the rate of response to mail questionnaires. The field design reported here consisted of an initial approach by mail, followed by reminder letters, telephone calls, and personal visits to nonrespondents. This procedure resulted in accurate identification of persons who, although included in the sampling frame, were not in the target population. This effectively removed from the sample about 12% of initially selected persons who were "out-of scope. " The follow-up activities also increased the response rate by persuading many initial nonrespondents to return questionnaires. The general elements of the design are suggested for consideration by evaluators seeking high response rates using data collection strategies that are realistic given the budgets available in small to medium size evaluations. The procedures are particularly useful in circumstances where the sampling frame is suspected of including cases outside the scope of the study .

Suggested Citation

  • Neil Atherton Day & David R. Dunt & Susan Day, 1995. "Maximizing Response to Surveys in Health Program Evaluation At Minimum Cost Using Multiple Methods," Evaluation Review, , vol. 19(4), pages 436-450, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:19:y:1995:i:4:p:436-450
    DOI: 10.1177/0193841X9501900405
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0193841X9501900405
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0193841X9501900405?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:19:y:1995:i:4:p:436-450. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.