79 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15284329)
1. Mailed questionnaires: length matters.
Edwards P
J Public Health (Oxf); 2004 Jun; 26(2):214; author reply 214-5. PubMed ID: 15284329
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Short report: encouraging GPs to complete postal questionnaires--one big prize or many small prizes? A randomized controlled trial.
Thomson CE; Paterson-Brown S; Russell D; McCaldin D; Russell IT
Fam Pract; 2004 Dec; 21(6):697-8. PubMed ID: 15531624
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A randomised controlled trial to assess the effectiveness of offering study results as an incentive to increase response rates to postal questionnaires [ISRCTN26118436].
Cockayne S; Torgerson DJ
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2005 Oct; 5():34. PubMed ID: 16250910
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparison of mailed vs. on-site emergency department patient satisfaction surveys.
Yarris LM; Fu R; Duby R; Frakes B; Brooks H; Norton RL
J Emerg Med; 2014 Dec; 47(6):702-9. PubMed ID: 25281169
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Increasing response rates to postal questionnaires. Effect of incentives on response rates must be considered.
Roberts PJ; Roberts C; Sibbald B; Torgerson DJ
BMJ; 2002 Aug; 325(7361):444. PubMed ID: 12201284
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Internet versus mailed questionnaires: a randomized comparison.
Ritter P; Lorig K; Laurent D; Matthews K
J Med Internet Res; 2004 Sep; 6(3):e29. PubMed ID: 15471755
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Subjective scales for the evaluation of therapeutic effects and their use in complementary medicine.
Liverani A; Minelli E; Ricciuti A
J Altern Complement Med; 2000 Jun; 6(3):257-64. PubMed ID: 10890336
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. What accompanies a postal questionnaire and why does it matter?
Lane JA
Soz Praventivmed; 2004; 49(6):413-5. PubMed ID: 15669442
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Utility of retrospective pretest ratings of patient satisfaction with health status.
Kreulen GJ; Stommel M; Gutek BA; Burns LR; Braden CJ
Res Nurs Health; 2002 Jun; 25(3):233-41. PubMed ID: 12015785
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Meta-analyses and large randomized, controlled trials.
Stewart LA; Parmar MK; Tierney JF
N Engl J Med; 1998 Jan; 338(1):61; author reply 61-2. PubMed ID: 9424569
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Meta-analyses and large randomized, controlled trials.
Ioannidis JP; Cappelleri JC; Lau J
N Engl J Med; 1998 Jan; 338(1):59; author reply 61-2. PubMed ID: 9424563
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Re: Should meta-analyses of interventions include observational studies in addition to randomized controlled trials? A critical examination of underlying principles.
Pereira C; Castilho E
Am J Epidemiol; 2009 Mar; 169(6):783; author reply 783-4. PubMed ID: 19208724
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Commentary: Empirical evidence of attrition bias in clinical trials.
Jüni P; Egger M
Int J Epidemiol; 2005 Feb; 34(1):87-8. PubMed ID: 15649954
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. PEDro's bias: summary quality scores should not be used in meta-analysis.
da Costa BR; Hilfiker R; Egger M
J Clin Epidemiol; 2013 Jan; 66(1):75-7. PubMed ID: 23177896
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Effect on survey response rate of hand written versus printed signature on a covering letter: randomised controlled trial [ISRCTN67566265].
McKenzie-McHarg K; Tully L; Gates S; Ayers S; Brocklehurst P
BMC Health Serv Res; 2005 Aug; 5():52. PubMed ID: 16091137
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The need for consensus on consensus methods.
Tugwell P; Knottnerus JA
J Clin Epidemiol; 2018 Jul; 99():vi-viii. PubMed ID: 29914728
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. The promise and problems of meta-analysis.
Bailar JC
N Engl J Med; 1997 Aug; 337(8):559-61. PubMed ID: 9262502
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. [A wide perspective on meta-analysis--may be of crucial significance for the patients].
Gøtzsche PC
Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen; 2000 Sep; 120(23):2810. PubMed ID: 11107932
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Internet versus mailed questionnaires: a randomized comparison (2).
Leece P; Bhandari M; Sprague S; Swiontkowski MF; Schemitsch EH; Tornetta P; Devereaux PJ; Guyatt GH
J Med Internet Res; 2004 Sep; 6(3):e30. PubMed ID: 15471756
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. [Response rates and non-response bias in a health-related mailed survey].
Nakai S; Hashimoto S; Murakami Y; Hayashi M; Manabe K; Noda H
Nihon Koshu Eisei Zasshi; 1997 Mar; 44(3):184-91. PubMed ID: 9175409
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
