Joan M. Griffin|Alisha Baines Simon|E. Hulbert|John Stevenson|Joseph P. Grill|Siamak Noorbaloochi|Melissa R. Partin
A comparison of small monetary incentives to convert survey non-respondents: a randomized control trial
Minneapolis VA Health Care System|Minneapolis VA Health Care System|Minneapolis VA Health Care System|Minneapolis VA Health Care System|Minneapolis VA Health Care System|Minneapolis VA Health Care System
maximizing response rates critically important order provide generalizable unbiased research results high response rates reduce chance respondents systematically different nonrespondents thus reduce risk results truly reflecting study population monetary incentives often used improve response rates little known whether larger incentives improve response rates previously unenthusiastic participating research study compared response rates costeffectiveness 5 versus 2 monetary incentive accompanying short survey mailed patients respond refused participate research study facetoface survey 1328 nonresponders randomly assigned receive 5 2 short 10question survey mail reminder postcards sent everyone returning survey sent second survey without incentive overall response rates response rates incentive condition odds responding larger incentive calculated total costs materials postage labor incremental costeffectiveness ratios also calculated compared incentive condition first mailing response rate within 5 group significantly higher 578 vs 477 p 001 second mailing difference narrowed 80 resulting nonsignificant difference cumulative rates 5 2 groups 673 vs 654 respectively p 47 regardless incentive number contacts respondents significantly likely male white married 5075 years old total costs higher larger versus smaller incentive 1377 versus 995 per completed survey 5 incentive provides significantly higher response rate 2 incentive one survey mailing used two survey mailings used