Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2018 Jun 20;18(1):59.
doi: 10.1186/s12874-018-0524-8.

Comparison of response rates on invitation mode of a web-based survey on influenza vaccine adverse events among healthcare workers: a pilot study

Xiaochen Tai  1 , Alanna M Smith  1 , Allison J McGeer  1   2 , Eve Dubé  3   4 , Dorothy Linn Holness  2   5 , Kevin Katz  2   6 , Linda McGillis Hall  2 , Shelly A McNeil  7   8   9   10 , Jeff Powis  11 , Brenda L Coleman  12   13
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparison of response rates on invitation mode of a web-based survey on influenza vaccine adverse events among healthcare workers: a pilot study

Xiaochen Tai et al. BMC Med Res Methodol. .

Abstract

Background: Web-based surveys have become increasingly popular but response rates are low and may be prone to selection bias. How people are invited to participate may impact response rates and needs further study as previous evidence is contradictory. The purpose of this study was to determine whether response to a web-based survey of healthcare workers would be higher with a posted or an emailed invitation. We also report results of the pilot study, which aims to estimate the percentage of adults vaccinated against influenza who report recurrent systemic adverse events (the same systemic adverse event occurring successively following receipt of influenza vaccines).

Methods: The pilot study was conducted in November 2016 in Toronto, Canada. Members of a registry of adults (18 years and older and predominantly healthcare workers) who volunteered to receive information regarding future studies about influenza were randomly assigned to receive either an email or postal invitation to complete a web-based survey regarding influenza vaccinations. Non-respondents received one reminder using the same mode of contact as their original invitation.

Results: The overall response rate was higher for those sent the invitation by email (34.8%) than by post (25.8%; p < 0.001) and for older versus younger participants (ptrend < 0.001). Of those who responded, 387/401 had been vaccinated against influenza at least once since adulthood. Of those responding to the question, 70/386 (18.1%) reported a systemic adverse event after their most recent influenza vaccine including 22 (5.7%) who reported a recurring systemic event. Systemic adverse events were reported more often by males 18-49 years old than by other groups (p = 0.01). Recurrent systemic adverse events were similar by age and sex with muscle ache being the most commonly reported recurrent reaction. More respondents who reported only a local adverse event (93.1%) planned to be vaccinated again next year than those with a systemic adverse event (69.7%; p = 0.04).

Conclusions: In this convenience sample of registry volunteers, response rates were generally low, but were higher for the emailed than posted invitations and for older than younger adults.

Keywords: Email invitation; Influenza; Invitation mode; Postal invitation; Response rate; Web-based survey.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The study was approved by the Sinai Health System research ethics board (REB #16–0267-E). Participants provided written consent prior to participation.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

BC, XT, AS, JP, LMH, AM, ED, DLH, KK, SM declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Survey completion flow chart
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Survey response time by mode of invitation
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Reinisch JF, Yu DC, Li WY. Getting a valid survey response from 662 plastic surgeons in the 21st century. Ann Plast Surg. 2016;76(1):3–5. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000000546. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Dykema J, Jones NR, Piche T, Stevenson J. Surveying clinicians by web: current issues in design and administration. Eval Health Prof. 2013;36(3):352–381. doi: 10.1177/0163278713496630. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hardigan PC, Succar CT, Fleisher JM. An analysis of response rate and economic costs between mail and web-based surveys among practicing dentists: a randomized trial. J Community Health. 2012;37(2):383–394. doi: 10.1007/s10900-011-9455-6. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sinclair M, O'Toole J, Malawaraarachchi M, Leder K. Comparison of response rates and cost-effectiveness for a community-based survey: postal, internet and telephone modes with generic or personalised recruitment approaches. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012;12:132. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-12-132. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Duffett M, Burns KE, Adhikari NK, Arnold DM, Lauzier F, Kho ME, Meade MO, Hayani O, Koo K, Choong K, et al. Quality of reporting of surveys in critical care journals: a methodologic review. Crit Care Med. 2012;40(2):441–449. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e318232d6c6. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Substances

Grants and funding