title: Editors and researchers beware: calculating response rates in random digit dial health surveys.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To demonstrate that different approaches to handling cases of unknown eligibility in random digit dial health surveys can contribute to significant differences in response rates.
  
  
  METHODS
  Primary survey data of individuals with chronic disease.
  
  
  METHODS
  We computed response rates using various approaches, each of which make different assumptions about the disposition of cases of unknown eligibility.
  
  
  METHODS
  Data were collected via telephone interviews as part of the Aligning Forces for Quality (AF4Q) consumer survey, a representative survey of adults with chronic illnesses in 17 communities and nationally.
  
  
  RESULTS
  We found that various approaches to estimating eligibility rates can lead to substantially different response rates.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Health services researchers must consider strategies to standardize response rate reporting, enter into a dialog related to why response rate reporting is important, and begin to utilize alternate methods for demonstrating that survey data are valid and reliable.
authors.affiliation: Department of Health Policy and Administration, Pennsylvania State University, Pittsburgh, PA 15219, USA. martsolfgr@upmc.edu
authors.forename: Grant R
authors.initials: GR
authors.lastname: Martsolf
authors.forename: Robert E
authors.initials: RE
authors.lastname: Schofield
authors.forename: David R
authors.initials: DR
authors.lastname: Johnson
authors.forename: Dennis P
authors.initials: DP
authors.lastname: Scanlon
mesh_terms: D002908:Chronic Disease; D003627:Data Interpretation, Statistical; D006306:Health Surveys / Q000379:methods* / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D006801:Humans; D012107:Research Design