TY - JOUR
T1 - "Bird in the hand" cash was more effective than prize draws in increasing physician questionnaire response
AU - Drummond, Frances J.
AU - O'Leary, Eamonn
AU - O'Neill, Ciaran
AU - Burns, Richeal
AU - Sharp, Linda
PY - 2014/2
Y1 - 2014/2
N2 - Objective To investigate the effects of two monetary incentives on response rates to postal questionnaires from primary care physicians (PCPs). Study Design and Setting The PCPs were randomized into three arms (n = 550 per arm), namely (1) €5 sent with the questionnaire (cash); (2) entry into a draw on return of completed questionnaire (prize); or (3) no incentive. Effects of incentives on response rates and item nonresponse were examined, as was cost-effectiveness. Results Response rates were significantly higher in the cash (66.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 61.9, 70.4%) and prize arms (44.8%; 95% CI: 40.1, 49.3%) compared with the no-incentive arm (39.9%; 95% CI: 35.4, 44.3%). Adjusted relative risk of response was 1.17 (95% CI: 1.02, 1.35) and 1.68 (95% CI: 1.48, 1.91) in the prize and cash arms, respectively, compared with the no-incentive group. Costs per completed questionnaire were €9.85, €11.15, and €6.31 for the cash, prize, and no-incentive arms, respectively. Compared with the no-incentive arm, costs per additional questionnaire returned in the cash and prize arms were €14.72 and €37.20, respectively. Conclusion Both a modest cash incentive and entry into a prize draw were effective in increasing response rates. The cash incentive was most effective and the most cost-effective. Where it is important to maximize response, a modest cash incentive may be cost-effective.
AB - Objective To investigate the effects of two monetary incentives on response rates to postal questionnaires from primary care physicians (PCPs). Study Design and Setting The PCPs were randomized into three arms (n = 550 per arm), namely (1) €5 sent with the questionnaire (cash); (2) entry into a draw on return of completed questionnaire (prize); or (3) no incentive. Effects of incentives on response rates and item nonresponse were examined, as was cost-effectiveness. Results Response rates were significantly higher in the cash (66.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 61.9, 70.4%) and prize arms (44.8%; 95% CI: 40.1, 49.3%) compared with the no-incentive arm (39.9%; 95% CI: 35.4, 44.3%). Adjusted relative risk of response was 1.17 (95% CI: 1.02, 1.35) and 1.68 (95% CI: 1.48, 1.91) in the prize and cash arms, respectively, compared with the no-incentive group. Costs per completed questionnaire were €9.85, €11.15, and €6.31 for the cash, prize, and no-incentive arms, respectively. Compared with the no-incentive arm, costs per additional questionnaire returned in the cash and prize arms were €14.72 and €37.20, respectively. Conclusion Both a modest cash incentive and entry into a prize draw were effective in increasing response rates. The cash incentive was most effective and the most cost-effective. Where it is important to maximize response, a modest cash incentive may be cost-effective.
KW - Cash
KW - Draw
KW - Monetary incentives
KW - Physicians
KW - Postal questionnaire
KW - Primary care'
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84891628529&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.08.016
DO - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.08.016
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84891628529
SN - 0895-4356
VL - 67
SP - 228
EP - 231
JO - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
JF - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
IS - 2
ER -