These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

66 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19911653)

  • 1. A research routine to assess bias introduced by low response rates in postal surveys.
    Ford R; Bammer G
    Nurse Res; 2009; 17(1):44-53. PubMed ID: 19911653
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Telephone versus postal surveys of general practitioners: methodological considerations.
    Sibbald B; Addington-Hall J; Brenneman D; Freeling P
    Br J Gen Pract; 1994 Jul; 44(384):297-300. PubMed ID: 8068375
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Increasing response rates in telephone surveys: a randomized trial.
    Smith W; Chey T; Jalaludin B; Salkeld G; Capon T
    J Public Health Med; 1995 Mar; 17(1):33-8. PubMed ID: 7786565
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Evaluating telephone follow-up of a mail survey of community pharmacies.
    Westrick SC; Mount JK
    Res Social Adm Pharm; 2007 Jun; 3(2):160-82. PubMed ID: 17561218
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. No increase in response rate by adding a web response option to a postal population survey: a randomized trial.
    Brøgger J; Nystad W; Cappelen I; Bakke P
    J Med Internet Res; 2007 Dec; 9(5):e40. PubMed ID: 18174120
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Surveying general practitioners: does a low response rate matter?
    Templeton L; Deehan A; Taylor C; Drummond C; Strang J
    Br J Gen Pract; 1997 Feb; 47(415):91-4. PubMed ID: 9101692
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Postal surveys of physicians gave superior response rates over telephone interviews in a randomized trial.
    Hocking JS; Lim MS; Read T; Hellard M
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2006 May; 59(5):521-4. PubMed ID: 16632141
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 'So much post, so busy with practice--so, no time!': a telephone survey of general practitioners' reasons for not participating in postal questionnaire surveys.
    Kaner EF; Haighton CA; McAvoy BR
    Br J Gen Pract; 1998 Mar; 48(428):1067-9. PubMed ID: 9624749
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Non-response bias in a postal questionnaire survey on respiratory health in the old and very old.
    Hardie JA; Bakke PS; Mørkve O
    Scand J Public Health; 2003; 31(6):411-7. PubMed ID: 14675932
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Nonresponse bias in a mail survey of physicians.
    McFarlane E; Olmsted MG; Murphy J; Hill CA
    Eval Health Prof; 2007 Jun; 30(2):170-85. PubMed ID: 17476029
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Increasing response to a postal survey of sedentary patients - a randomised controlled trial [ISRCTN45665423].
    Harrison RA; Cock D
    BMC Health Serv Res; 2004 Nov; 4(1):31. PubMed ID: 15537429
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Geographic Information System mapping as a tool to assess nonresponse bias in survey research.
    Hansen RA; Henley AC; Brouwer ES; Oraefo AN; Roth MT
    Res Social Adm Pharm; 2007 Sep; 3(3):249-64. PubMed ID: 17945157
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Survey response inducements for registered nurses.
    Hill CA; Fahrney K; Wheeless SC; Carson CP
    West J Nurs Res; 2006 Apr; 28(3):322-34. PubMed ID: 16585808
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A confidence interval approach to investigating non-response bias and monitoring response to postal questionnaires.
    Tennant A; Badley EM
    J Epidemiol Community Health; 1991 Mar; 45(1):81-5. PubMed ID: 1828494
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Prospective comparison of endoscopy patient satisfaction surveys: e-mail versus standard mail versus telephone.
    Harewood GC; Yacavone RF; Locke GR; Wiersema MJ
    Am J Gastroenterol; 2001 Dec; 96(12):3312-7. PubMed ID: 11774942
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Electronic surveys: how to maximise success.
    McPeake J; Bateson M; O'Neill A
    Nurse Res; 2014 Jan; 21(3):24-6. PubMed ID: 24460562
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Mixed-mode administration reduced bias and enhanced poststratification adjustments in a health behavior survey.
    Baines AD; Partin MR; Davern M; Rockwood TH
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2007 Dec; 60(12):1246-55. PubMed ID: 17998079
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Use of a coded postcard to maintain anonymity in a highly sensitive mail survey: cost, response rates, and bias.
    Asch DA
    Epidemiology; 1996 Sep; 7(5):550-1. PubMed ID: 8862992
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Mixing web and mail methods in a survey of physicians.
    Beebe TJ; Locke GR; Barnes SA; Davern ME; Anderson KJ
    Health Serv Res; 2007 Jun; 42(3 Pt 1):1219-34. PubMed ID: 17489911
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Does mode matter? A comparison of telephone, mail, and in-person treatments in contingent valuation surveys.
    Maguire KB
    J Environ Manage; 2009 Aug; 90(11):3528-33. PubMed ID: 19647362
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.