Home > Publications . Search All . Browse All . Country . Browse PSC Pubs . PSC Report Series

PSC In The News

RSS Feed icon

Shaefer says drop child tax credit in favor of universal, direct investment in American children

Buchmueller breaks down partisan views on Obamacare

ISR's Conrad says mobile phone polling faces non-response bias

More News


Gonzalez, Alter, and Dinov win NSF "Big Data Spokes" award for neuroscience network

Post-doc Melanie Wasserman wins dissertation award from Upjohn Institute

ISR kicks off DE&I initiative with lunchtime presentation: Oct 13, noon, 1430 ISR Thompson

U-M ranked #4 in USN&WR's top public universities

More Highlights

Next Brown Bag

Mon, Oct 24 at noon:
Academic innovation & the global public research university, James Hilton

Mick P. Couper photo

Following up Nonrespondents to an online weight management intervention: Randomized trial comparing mail versus telephone

Publication Abstract

Couper, Mick P., A. Peytchev, V.J. Strecher, K. Rothert, and John Ellis Anderson. 2007. "Following up Nonrespondents to an online weight management intervention: Randomized trial comparing mail versus telephone." Journal of Medical Internet Research, 9(2): e16.

Background: Attrition, or dropout, is a problem faced by many online health interventions, potentially threatening the inferential value of online randomized controlled trials. Objective: In the context of a randomized controlled trial of an online weight management intervention, where 85% of the baseline participants were lost to follow-up at the 12-month measurement, the objective was to examine the effect of nonresponse on key outcomes and explore ways to reduce attrition in follow-up surveys. Methods: A sample of 700 nonrespondents to the 12-month online follow-up survey was randomly assigned to a mail or telephone nonresponse follow-up survey. We examined response rates in the two groups, costs of follow-up, reasons for nonresponse, and mode effects. We ran several logistic regression models, predicting response or nonresponse to the 12-month online survey as well as predicting response or nonresponse to the follow-up survey. Results: We analyzed 210 follow-up respondents in the mail and 170 in the telephone group. Response rates of 59% and 55% were obtained for the telephone and mail nonresponse follow-up surveys, respectively. A total of 197 respondents (51.8%) gave reasons related to technical issues or email as a means of communication, with older people more likely to give technical reasons for noncompletion; 144 (37.9%) gave reasons related to the intervention or the survey itself. Mail follow-up was substantially cheaper: We estimate that the telephone survey cost about US $34 per sampled case, compared to US $15 for the mail survey. The telephone responses were subject to possible social desirability effects, with the telephone respondents reporting significantly greater weight loss than the mail respondents. The respondents to the nonresponse follow-up did not differ significantly from the 12-month online respondents on key outcome variables. Conclusions: Mail is an effective way to reduce attrition to online surveys, while telephone follow-up might lead to overestimating the weight loss for both the treatment and control groups. Nonresponse bias does not appear to be a significant factor in the conclusions drawn from the randomized controlled trial.

DOI:10.2196/jmir.9.2.e16 (Full Text)

PMCID: PMC1913938. (Pub Med Central)

Public Access Link

Browse | Search : All Pubs | Next