Postal surveys of physicians gave superior response rates over telephone interviews in a randomized trial

Jane S. Hocking, M. S C Lim, Tim Read, Margaret Hellard

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

42 Citations (Scopus)


Background and Objectives: To compare general practitioner (GP) response to a telephone interview with response to a postal survey with three reminders in a randomized controlled trial. Methods: GPs were randomly assigned to either a telephone interview or a postal survey. GPs in the telephone group were mailed a letter of invitation and asked to undertake a telephone interview. GPs in the postal group were mailed a letter of invitation and questionnaire. Non-responders were sent up to three reminders, the final by registered post. Response rates were calculated for each group. Results: 416 GPs were randomized to the telephone interview and 451 to the postal survey. Eighty-six in the telephone group and 30 in the postal were ineligible. One hundred thirty-four GPs completed the telephone interview with a response rate of 40.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 35.3%, 46.1%). Two hundred fifty-two GPs completed the postal survey with a response rate of 59.9% (95%CI: 55.0%, 64.6%). The difference in response was 19.3% (95%CI: 12.2%, 26.3%). Conclusions: These results show that postal surveys with three reminders can have superior response rates compared with a telephone interview.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)521-524
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of Clinical Epidemiology
Issue number5
Publication statusPublished - 1 May 2006


  • General practitioners
  • Postal survey
  • RCT
  • Response rate
  • Telephone interview

Cite this