Sentinel physician networks as a technique for rapid immunization policy surveys
Sentinel physician networks as a technique for rapid immunization policy surveys
复制标题
DOI：
10.1177/0163278707311872
复制
发表时间：
2008-03-01
影响因子：
2.9
通讯作者：
Stokley, Shannon
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Crane, Lori A.;Daley, Matthew F.;Stokley, Shannon
本研究比较了在三个国家疫苗政策调查中使用的医生哨点网络的邮件和互联网调查与传统的随机抽样邮件调查。建立了三个具有全国代表性的医生哨点网络（儿科医生，n = 427；普通内科医生，n = 438；家庭医生，n = 433）。哨兵网络的调查与美国医学协会（AMA）医师大师档案随机抽样进行的同时调查进行了比较。定点调查的回复率为74%至78%，传统随机抽样调查的回复率为29%至43%。这两种方法的调查对象在人口统计学特征上一般具有可比性。虽然对调查主题问题的回答存在一些差异，但这些差异都不太可能影响政策决定。哨兵网络以一种相当于传统邮件调查的方式代表医生的意见和经验，并可能提供一种更有效的方法来进行医生调查。
This study compared the use of mail and Internet surveys of sentinel networks of physicians with traditional random sample mail surveys for three national vaccine policy surveys. Three nationally representative sentinel networks of physicians were established (pediatricians, n = 427; general internists, n = 438; and family physicians, n = 433). Surveys of the sentinel networks were compared with simultaneous surveys conducted with random samples of the American Medical Association (AMA) Physician Masterfile. Response rates were 74% to 78% for sentinel surveys and 29% to 43% for traditional random sample surveys. Respondents to the two methods were generally comparable in demographic characteristics. While there were some differences in responses to survey topic questions, none of the differences were likely to affect policy decisions. Sentinel networks represent the opinions and experiences of physicians in a manner equivalent to traditional mail surveys and may provide a more efficient approach to conducting physician surveys.