Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Handwritten versus scanned signature on the invitation letter: does it make any difference in participation in a population-based study?

  • Letter to the Editor
  • Published:
European Journal of Epidemiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Clausen JA, Ford RN. Controlling bias in mailing questionnaires. J Am Stat Assoc. 1947;42:497–511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Scott P, Edwards P. Personally addressed hand-signed letters increase questionnaire response: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMC Health Serv Res. 2006;6:111.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Maheux B, Legault C, Lambert J. Increasing response rates in physicians’ mail surveys: an experimental study. Am J Public Health. 1989;79:638–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Leece P, Bhandari M, Sprague S, Swiontkowski MF, Schemitsch EH, Tornetta P. Does flattery work? A comparison of 2 different cover letters for an international survey of orthopedic surgeons. Can J Surg. 2006;49:90–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Dodd DK, Boswell DL, Litwin WJ. Survey response rate as a function of number of signatures, signature ink color, and postscript on covering letter. Psychol Rep. 1988;63:538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Dodd DK, Markwiese BJ. Survey response rate as a function of personalized signature on cover letter. J Soc Psychol. 1987;127:97–8.

    Google Scholar 

  7. McKenzie-McHarg K, Tully L, Gates S, Ayers S, Brocklehurst P. Effect on survey response rate of hand written versus printed signature on a covering letter: randomised controlled trial [ISRCTN67566265]. BMC Health Serv Res. 2005;5:52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Archer J. Sex differences in social behavior: are the social role and evolutionary explanations compatible? Performance Characteristics of the ARCHITECT Galectin-3 Assay. Am Psychol. 1996;51:909–17.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Hare-Mustin RT, Marecek J. The meaning of difference: gender theory, postmodernism, and psychology. Am Psychol. 1988;43:455–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Edwards PJ, Roberts I, Clarke MJ, Diguiseppi C, Wentz R, Kwan I, et al. Methods to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009: MR000008.

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Montse Ferré for coordinating the fieldwork. This work was partly supported by the Instituto de Salud Carlos III [PI081436, RD06/0020/0089, and RD12/0036/0053] and the Department of Universities and Research, Government of Catalonia [grant 2009SGR192].

Conflict of interests

The Authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Tobacco Control Unit, Cancer Control and Prevention Programme, Institut Català d’Oncologia, ICO, Av. Granvia de L’Hospitalet, 199-203, 08908, L’Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain

    Marcela Fu, Jose M. Martínez-Sánchez, Xisca Sureda, Cristina Martínez, Montse Ballbè, Anna Riccobene & Esteve Fernández

  2. Cancer Control and Prevention Group, Institut d’Investigació Biomèdica de Bellvitge, IDIBELL, L’Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain

    Marcela Fu, Jose M. Martínez-Sánchez, Xisca Sureda, Cristina Martínez, Montse Ballbè, Lucía Baranda, Anna Riccobene & Esteve Fernández

  3. Department of Clinical Sciences, School of Medicine, Universitat de Barcelona-Campus Bellvitge, L’Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain

    Marcela Fu, Xisca Sureda, Cristina Martínez & Esteve Fernández

  4. Biostatistics Unit, Department of Basic Sciences, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Sant Cugat del Vallès, Barcelona, Spain

    Jose M. Martínez-Sánchez

  5. Alcohol Unit, Institute of Neurosciences, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain

    Montse Ballbè

Authors
  1. Marcela Fu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jose M. Martínez-Sánchez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Xisca Sureda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Cristina Martínez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Montse Ballbè
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Lucía Baranda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Anna Riccobene
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Esteve Fernández
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Esteve Fernández.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fu, M., Martínez-Sánchez, J.M., Sureda, X. et al. Handwritten versus scanned signature on the invitation letter: does it make any difference in participation in a population-based study?. Eur J Epidemiol 28, 931–934 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-013-9838-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-013-9838-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation