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
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2019 Jul 9;19(1):144.
doi: 10.1186/s12874-019-0789-6.

Means of increasing response rates in a Norwegian dietary survey among infants - results from a pseudo-randomized pilot study

Jannicke Borch Myhre  1 , Lene Frost Andersen  2 , Kristin Holvik  3 , Helene Astrup  2 , Anne Lene Kristiansen  2
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Means of increasing response rates in a Norwegian dietary survey among infants - results from a pseudo-randomized pilot study

Jannicke Borch Myhre et al. BMC Med Res Methodol. .

Abstract

Background: Postal surveys are widely used in scientific studies, including dietary surveys, but few studies about methods to increase participation in national dietary surveys are published. In the present study we compared response rates in a pilot study to a national dietary survey among infants using two different incentives (gift certificate or lottery), personalization in the form of handwritten name and address vs. a printed label and mode of sending out invitations (e-mail or postal invitation).

Methods: In this parallel-design pseudo-randomized pilot trial, a nationally representative sample of 698 mothers of infants aged 6 and 12 months was drawn from the Norwegian National Registry and invited to complete a food frequency questionnaire about their infant's diet. One half of the mothers of 6 month olds were randomized by alternation to the lottery group (n = 198) and offered to participate in a lottery of two prizes (500 EUR and 1000 EUR). The other half (n = 200) was offered a gift certificate (50 EUR) upon completion of the questionnaire. Each incentive group was randomized by alternation to receiving an invitation with handwritten name and address or a printed label. For the mothers of infants aged 12 months (n = 300), 150 mothers received an e-mail invitation and 150 mothers received a postal invitation. Logistic regression was used for testing differences between the groups.

Results: The response rate was significantly higher (p = 0.028) in the gift certificate group (72%) than in the lottery group (62%). No difference was seen between those receiving an invitation with a handwritten name and address (68%) compared to a printed label (66%, p = 0.72). A somewhat higher response rate was seen when using the postal (50%) compared to the e-mail invitation (43%, p = 0.25).

Conclusions: In this pseudo-randomized parallel-design trial of women participating in a national dietary survey among infants, the response rate was higher when offered a gift certificate than when participating in a lottery. Handwritten name and address did not affect participation compared to a printed label. Only a moderate difference was seen between the postal and e-mail invitation. Others conducting similar methodological studies are encouraged to publish their results to expand the knowledge basis in this area.

Keywords: “Dietary survey”; “E-mail invitation”; “Incentive”; “Lottery”; “Monetary incentive”; “Personalization”; “Postal invitation”; “Printed label”; “Response rate”; “handwritten name and address”.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow chart of study design
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Colditz GA. Nurses’ Health Study: demonstrating the impact of research, and adapting new measures and approaches to increase relevance and effect of cohort studies. Public health research & practice. 2016;26(3). Epub 2016/07/17. doi: 10.17061/phrp2631628. PubMed PMID: 27421340. - PubMed
    1. Merritt Melissa A, Tzoulaki Ioanna, van den Brandt Piet A, Schouten Leo J, Tsilidis Konstantinos K, Weiderpass Elisabete, Patel Chirag J, Tjønneland Anne, Hansen Louise, Overvad Kim, His Mathilde, Dartois Laureen, Boutron-Ruault Marie-Christine, Fortner Renée T, Kaaks Rudolf, Aleksandrova Krasimira, Boeing Heiner, Trichopoulou Antonia, Lagiou Pagona, Bamia Christina, Palli Domenico, Krogh Vittorio, Tumino Rosario, Ricceri Fulvio, Mattiello Amalia, Bueno-de-Mesquita H Bas, Onland-Moret N Charlotte, Peeters Petra H, Skeie Guri, Jareid Mie, Quirós J Ramón, Obón-Santacana Mireia, Sánchez María-José, Chamosa Saioa, Huerta José M, Barricarte Aurelio, Dias Joana A, Sonestedt Emily, Idahl Annika, Lundin Eva, Wareham Nicholas J, Khaw Kay-Tee, Travis Ruth C, Ferrari Pietro, Riboli Elio, Gunter Marc J. Nutrient-wide association study of 57 foods/nutrients and epithelial ovarian cancer in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition study and the Netherlands Cohort Study. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 2015;103(1):161–167. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.115.118588. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kristiansen AL, Lande B, Overby NC, Andersen LF. Factors associated with exclusive breast-feeding and breast-feeding in Norway. Public Health Nutr. 2010;13(12):2087–2096. doi: 10.1017/S1368980010002156. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Willett W. Nutritional epidemiology. New York, USA: Oxford University Press; 2013.
    1. Galea Sandro, Tracy Melissa. Participation Rates in Epidemiologic Studies. Annals of Epidemiology. 2007;17(9):643–653. doi: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2007.03.013. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources