Health status and disability comparisons between CATI calendar and conventional questionnaire instruments

Health status and disability comparisons between CATI calendar and conventional questionnaire... In comparison to conventional questionnaires, calendar interviews produce higher quality retrospective reports of factual information. This study sought to examine whether calendar interviews would also be advantageous in collecting retrospective reports of subjective assessment information. Respondents in a panel study were randomly assigned to either a calendar or conventional questionnaire method; both methods asked for retrospective reports on years in which disability was present and annual health status since young childhood. Panel data served as a source of validation for the retrospective reports. Both methods tended to underreport the number of years disabled and yielded mean levels of better annual health status in comparison to the panel reports. Calendar interviews demonstrated higher quality retrospective reports for disability in yielding a significantly stronger correlation in the frequency of years being disabled and in providing a greater number of years of higher annual correspondence with the panel data in comparison to the conventional questionnaire. Calendar interviews also demonstrated the ability to preserve the slope of change associated with aging as seen in the panel data, whereas the conventional questionnaire led to a significantly shallower slope of change. This latter finding could not be explained by the presence of an acquiescence bias. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Quality & Quantity Springer Journals

Health status and disability comparisons between CATI calendar and conventional questionnaire instruments

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer_journal/health-status-and-disability-comparisons-between-cati-calendar-and-Xaz7euk6Qu
Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 2010 by Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
Subject
Social Sciences; Methodology of the Social Sciences; Social Sciences, general
ISSN
0033-5177
eISSN
1573-7845
D.O.I.
10.1007/s11135-010-9415-8
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

In comparison to conventional questionnaires, calendar interviews produce higher quality retrospective reports of factual information. This study sought to examine whether calendar interviews would also be advantageous in collecting retrospective reports of subjective assessment information. Respondents in a panel study were randomly assigned to either a calendar or conventional questionnaire method; both methods asked for retrospective reports on years in which disability was present and annual health status since young childhood. Panel data served as a source of validation for the retrospective reports. Both methods tended to underreport the number of years disabled and yielded mean levels of better annual health status in comparison to the panel reports. Calendar interviews demonstrated higher quality retrospective reports for disability in yielding a significantly stronger correlation in the frequency of years being disabled and in providing a greater number of years of higher annual correspondence with the panel data in comparison to the conventional questionnaire. Calendar interviews also demonstrated the ability to preserve the slope of change associated with aging as seen in the panel data, whereas the conventional questionnaire led to a significantly shallower slope of change. This latter finding could not be explained by the presence of an acquiescence bias.

Journal

Quality & QuantitySpringer Journals

Published: Jan 1, 2011

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off