The effect of response scale, administration mode, and format on responses to the CAHPS Clinician and Group survey
- PMID: 24471975
- PMCID: PMC4239855
- DOI: 10.1111/1475-6773.12160
The effect of response scale, administration mode, and format on responses to the CAHPS Clinician and Group survey
Abstract
Objective: To examine how different response scales, methods of survey administration, and survey format affect responses to the CAHPS (Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems) Clinician and Group (CG-CAHPS) survey.
Study design: A total of 6,500 patients from a university health center were randomly assigned to receive the following: standard 12-page mail surveys using 4-category or 6-category response scales (on CG-CAHPS composite items), telephone surveys using 4-category or 6-category response scales, or four-page mail surveys.
Principal findings: A total of 3,538 patients completed surveys. Composite score means and provider-level reliabilities did not differ between respondents receiving 4-category or 6-category response scale surveys or between 12-page and four-page mail surveys. Telephone respondents gave more positive responses than mail respondents.
Conclusions: We recommend using 4-category response scales and the four-page mail CG-CAHPS survey.
Keywords: CAHPS; patient experience surveys; survey methods.
© Health Research and Educational Trust.
Figures
References
-
- AHRQ, American Institutes for Research, Harvard Medical, School, and RAND Corporation. 2006. “The Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) Clinician and Group Survey: Submission to National Quality Forum” [accessed on December 17, 2012]. Available at http://www.aqaalliance.org/October24Meeting/PerformanceMeasurement/CAHPS....
-
- Bowling A. “Mode of Questionnaire Administration Can Have Serious Effects on Data Quality”. Journal of Public Health. 2005;27(3):281–91. - PubMed
-
- Dillman DA, Sangster RL, Tarnai J. Rockwood TH. “Understanding Differences in People's Answers to Telephone and Mail Surveys”. New Directions for Evaluation. 1996;1996(70):45–61.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources