Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Survey Research

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Health Services Research

Part of the book series: Success in Academic Surgery ((SIAS))

  • 965 Accesses

Abstract

Surveys, and survey research, have become ubiquitous; as such, the value of survey research in the eyes of many has diminished. However, there are certain things that are best studied via survey, including beliefs and attitudes. Importantly, quality of life must be ascertained by survey. This chapter highlights the elements of high-quality survey research, focusing on instrument development, mode of administration, response burden, response rate, nonresponse bias, and reporting survey results. Specific strategies for developing good questions and increasing response rates are outlined. Specific analytic techniques related to nonrandom sampling frames, statistical packages, and Likert-type questions are reviewed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Scholle SH, Pincus HA. Survey research: think…think again. Acad Psychiatry. 2003;27:114–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Phillips AW, Friedman BT, Utrankar A, Ta A, Reddy ST, Durning SJ. Surveys of health professions trainees: prevalence, response rates, and predictive factors to guide researchers. Acad Med. 2017;92:222–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Alderman AK, Salem B. Survey research. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;126:1381–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Burns KE, Duffet M, Kho M, et al. A guide for the design and conduct of self-administered surveys of clinicians. CMAJ. 2008;179:245–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Fowler FJ. Improving survey questions: design and evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Jones TL, Baxter MAJ, Khanduja V. A quick guide to survey research. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2013;95:5–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Krosnik JA. Survey research. Annu Rev Psychol. 1999;50:537–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Klabunde CN, Willis GB, McLeod CC, et al. Improving the quality of surveys of physicians and medical groups: a research agenda. Eval Health Prof. 2012;35:477–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. West BT. Statistical and methodological issues in the analysis of complex sample survey data: practical guidance for trauma researchers. J Trauma Stress. 2008;21:440–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Thoma A, Cornacchi SD, Farrokhyar F, Bhandari M, Goldsmith CH, for the Evidence-Based Surgery Working Group Users’ Guide to the Surgical Literature. How to assess a survey in surgery. Can J Surg. 2011;54(6):394–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Feigelson HS, McMullen CK, Madrid S, et al. Optimizing patient-reported outcome and risk factor reporting from cancer survivors: a randomized trial of four different survey methods among colorectal cancer survivors. J Cancer Surviv. 2017;11(3):393–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kelley K, Clark B, Brown V, Sitzia J. Good practice in the conduct and reporting of survey research. International J Qual Health Care. 2003;15:261–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Scott A, Jeon SH, Joyce CM, et al. A randomised trial and economic evaluation of the effect of response mode on response rate, response bias, and item non-response in a survey of doctors. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011;11:126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Hagan TL, Belcher SM, Donovan HS. Mind the mode: differences in paper vs. web-based survey modes among women with cancer. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2017;54(3):368–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kroth PJ, McPherson L, Leverence R, et al. Combining web-based and mail surveys improves response rates: a PBRN study from PRIME Net. Ann Fam Med. 2009;7:245–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Zuidgeest M, Hendriks M, Koopman L, Spreeuwenberg P, Rademakers J. A comparison of a postal survey and mixed-mode survey using a questionnaire on patients’ experiences with breast care. J Med Internet Res. 2011;13(3):e68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Broering JM, Paciorek A, Carroll PR, et al. Measurement equivalence using a mixed-mode approach to administer health-related quality of life instruments. Qual Life Res. 2014;23(2):495–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. The American Association for Public Opinion Research. Standard definitions: final dispositions of case codes and outcome rates for surveys. 7th ed. Chicago, IL: AAPOR; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Phillips AW, Friedman BT, Durning SJ. How to calculate a survey response rate: best practices. Acad Med. 2017;92(2):269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Draugalis JR, Plaza CM. Best practices for survey research reports revisited: implications of target population, probability sampling, and response rate. Am Pharm Educ. 2009;73:1–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Gore-Felton C, Koopman C, Bridges E, et al. An example of maximizing survey return rates: methodological issues for health professionals. Eval Health Prof. 2002;25:152–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Groves RM. Nonresponse rates and nonresponse bias in household surveys. Public Opin Q. 2006;70:646–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Thorpe C, Ryan B, McLean SL, et al. How to obtain excellent response rates when surveying physicians. Fam Pract. 2009;26:65–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Ulrich CM, Danis M, Koziol D, et al. Does it pay to pay? Nursing Res. 2005;54:178–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Olsen F, Abelsen B, Olsen JA. Improving response rate and quality of survey data with a scratch lottery ticket incentive. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012;12:52–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Viera AJ, Edwards T. Does an offer for a free on-line continuing medical education (CME) activity increase physician survey response rate? A randomized trial. BMC Res Notes. 2012;5:129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Livingston EH, Wislar JS. Minimum response rates for survey research. Arch Surg. 2012;147:110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Davern M. Nonresponse rates are a problematic Indicator of nonresponse Bias in survey research. Health Serv Res. 2013 Jun;48(3):905–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Olson K. Survey participation, nonresponse bias, measurement error bias, and total bias. Public Opin Q. 2006;70:737–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Gob R, McCollin C, Ramalhoto MF. Ordinal methodology in the analysis of Likert scales. Qual Quant. 2007;41:601–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Boone HN, Boone DA. Analyzing Likert data. J Extension. 2012;50:2T0T2.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Story DA, Gin V, na Ranong V, et al. Inconsistent survey reporting in anesthesia journals. Anesth Analg. 2011;113:591–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA

    Karen J. Brasel

Authors
  1. Karen J. Brasel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Karen J. Brasel .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

    Justin B. Dimick

  2. Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA

    Carrie C. Lubitz

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Brasel, K.J. (2020). Survey Research. In: Dimick, J., Lubitz, C. (eds) Health Services Research. Success in Academic Surgery. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28357-5_20

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28357-5_20

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-28356-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-28357-5

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation