International health policy survey in 11 countries: assessment of non-response bias in the Norwegian sample.

2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10143/95140
Title:
International health policy survey in 11 countries: assessment of non-response bias in the Norwegian sample.
Authors:
Bjertnæs, Øyvind Andresen; Iversen, Hilde Hestad; Bukholm, Geir
Citation:
BMC health services research 2010, 10:38
Additional Links:
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6963/10/38

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.authorBjertnæs, Øyvind Andresenen
dc.contributor.authorIversen, Hilde Hestaden
dc.contributor.authorBukholm, Geiren
dc.date.accessioned2010-03-29T10:41:22Z-
dc.date.available2010-03-29T10:41:22Z-
dc.date.issued2010-02-10-
dc.identifier.citationBMC health services research 2010, 10:38en
dc.identifier.issn1472-6963-
dc.identifier.pmid20146819-
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/1472-6963-10-38-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10143/95140-
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: International health policy surveys are used to compare and evaluate health system performance, but little is known about the effects of non-response. The objective of this study was to assess the effects of non-response in the Norwegian part of the Commonwealth Fund international health policy survey in 2009. METHODS: As part of an international health policy survey in 2009 a cross-sectional survey was conducted in Norway among a representative sample of Norwegian general practitioners. 1,400 randomly selected GPs were sent a postal questionnaire including questions about the Norwegian health care system, the quality of the GPs' own practice and the cooperation with specialist health care. The survey included three postal reminders and a telephone follow-up of postal non-respondents. The main outcome measures were increase in response rate for each reminder, the effects of demographic and practice variables on response, the effects of non-response on survey estimates, and the cost-effectiveness of each reminder. RESULTS: After three postal reminders and one telephone follow-up, the response rate was 59.1%. Statistically significant differences between respondents and non-respondents were found for three variables; group vs. solo practice (p = 0.01), being a specialist or not (p < 0.001) and municipality centrality (least central vs. most central, p = 0.03). However, demographic and practice variables had little association with five outcome variables and the overall survey estimates changed little with additional reminders. In addition, the cost-effectiveness of the final reminders was poor. CONCLUSIONS: The response rate in the Norwegian survey was satisfactory, and the effect of non-response was small indicating adequate representativeness. The cost-effectiveness of the final reminders was poor. The Norwegian findings strengthen the international project, but restrictions in generalizability warrant further study in other countries.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.relation.urlhttp://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6963/10/38en
dc.subjectVDP::Medisinske Fag: 700::Helsefag: 800::Helsetjeneste- og helseadministrasjonsforskning: 806en
dc.subjectVDP::Medisinske Fag: 700::Helsefag: 800::Epidemiologi medisinsk og odontologisk statistikk: 803en
dc.subject.meshBias (Epidemiology)en
dc.subject.meshCross-Sectional Studiesen
dc.subject.meshData Collectionen
dc.subject.meshHealth Policyen
dc.subject.meshHealth Surveysen
dc.subject.meshHumansen
dc.subject.meshInternationalityen
dc.subject.meshNorwayen
dc.subject.meshQuestionnairesen
dc.titleInternational health policy survey in 11 countries: assessment of non-response bias in the Norwegian sample.en
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.typepeer revieweden
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment for Quality Measurement and Patient Safety, Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, Oslo, Norway. oan@kunnskapssenteret.noen
dc.identifier.journalBMC health services researchen
All Items in HeRA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.