Effect of several recruitment strategies on response rates at baseline in a prospective cohort investigation The Olmsted county study of urinary symptoms and health status among men

Laurel A. Panser, Christopher G. Chute, Cynthia J. Girman, Harry A. Guess, Joseph E. Oesterling, Michael M. Lieber, Steven J. Jacobsen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Epidemiologic survey response rates were studied in relation to maneuvers introduced to improve acceptance: (a) variation in invitation letters, (b) the use of a brochure with the recruitment mailing, and (c) options for interview location. The baseline population-based survey of a prospective cohort investigation of the natural history of benign prostatic hyperplasia was used. Invitations to particpate were mailed to eligible, randomly selected men aged 40 to 79 years from the Olmsted County, Minnesota, population during 1989 to 1991. Of the 3874 men identified, 2119 (55%) participated. Overall, there was no difference in response rate according to invitation characteristics (χ52 = 8.02, P = 0.16). Nevertheless, response rates varied with age (χ72 = 30.9, P < 0.001) and home location (rural versus Rochester city; χ12 = 76.9, P < 0.001). This suggests the innovations used to bolster acceptance did not materially improve response rates. Further, since response rates were highest for men aged 60 to 74 years, men with more symptoms and free time may have joined the cohort more often than others.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)321-326
Number of pages6
JournalAnnals of epidemiology
Volume4
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1994
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Epidemiologic methods
  • cohort studies
  • health surveys
  • nonresponse bias

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Epidemiology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Effect of several recruitment strategies on response rates at baseline in a prospective cohort investigation The Olmsted county study of urinary symptoms and health status among men'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this