Triangulating differential nonresponse by race in a telephone survey.

Jessica T. DeFrank, J. Michael Bowling, Barbara K. Rimer, Jennifer M. Gierisch, Celette Sugg Skinner

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

17 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: In 1994, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services mandated sufficient inclusion of racial and ethnic minorities in all federally funded research. This mandate requires researchers to monitor study samples for research participation and differential survey nonresponse. This study illustrates methods to assess differential survey nonresponse when population race data are incomplete, which is often the case when studies are conducted among members of health plans. METHODS: We collected data as part of the PRISM (Personally Relevant Information about Screening Mammography) study, a trial funded by the National Institutes of Health to increase rates of annual mammography adherence. We used two methods to estimate racial distribution of the PRISM study population. The first method, called E-Tech, estimated race of the sample frame by using individuals' names and zip codes. In the second method, we conducted interviews with a subsample of PRISM study refusals. We validated both estimation methods through comparisons with self-reported race. We used race information generated by E-Tech, interviewer estimates, and self-report to assess differential nonresponse in the PRISM study. RESULTS: The E-Tech method had moderate sensitivity (48%) in estimating race of black participants but higher specificity (97%) and positive predictive value (71%). The interviewer-estimation method had high sensitivity (100%), high specificity (95%), and moderate positive predictive value (80%). Black women were less likely than white women to be reached for study participation. CONCLUSION: There was slight differential nonresponse by race in the PRISM study. Techniques described here may be useful for assessing differential nonresponse in samples with incomplete data on race.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalPreventing chronic disease
Volume4
Issue number3
StatePublished - Jul 2007

Fingerprint

Telephone
Mammography
Interviews
United States Dept. of Health and Human Services
National Institutes of Health (U.S.)
Surveys and Questionnaires
Research
Self Report
Population
Names
Research Personnel
Health

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

DeFrank, J. T., Bowling, J. M., Rimer, B. K., Gierisch, J. M., & Skinner, C. S. (2007). Triangulating differential nonresponse by race in a telephone survey. Preventing chronic disease, 4(3).

Triangulating differential nonresponse by race in a telephone survey. / DeFrank, Jessica T.; Bowling, J. Michael; Rimer, Barbara K.; Gierisch, Jennifer M.; Skinner, Celette Sugg.

In: Preventing chronic disease, Vol. 4, No. 3, 07.2007.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

DeFrank, JT, Bowling, JM, Rimer, BK, Gierisch, JM & Skinner, CS 2007, 'Triangulating differential nonresponse by race in a telephone survey.', Preventing chronic disease, vol. 4, no. 3.
DeFrank, Jessica T. ; Bowling, J. Michael ; Rimer, Barbara K. ; Gierisch, Jennifer M. ; Skinner, Celette Sugg. / Triangulating differential nonresponse by race in a telephone survey. In: Preventing chronic disease. 2007 ; Vol. 4, No. 3.
@article{c7129e35fd5d495bb1bacf6dfee0c726,
title = "Triangulating differential nonresponse by race in a telephone survey.",
abstract = "INTRODUCTION: In 1994, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services mandated sufficient inclusion of racial and ethnic minorities in all federally funded research. This mandate requires researchers to monitor study samples for research participation and differential survey nonresponse. This study illustrates methods to assess differential survey nonresponse when population race data are incomplete, which is often the case when studies are conducted among members of health plans. METHODS: We collected data as part of the PRISM (Personally Relevant Information about Screening Mammography) study, a trial funded by the National Institutes of Health to increase rates of annual mammography adherence. We used two methods to estimate racial distribution of the PRISM study population. The first method, called E-Tech, estimated race of the sample frame by using individuals' names and zip codes. In the second method, we conducted interviews with a subsample of PRISM study refusals. We validated both estimation methods through comparisons with self-reported race. We used race information generated by E-Tech, interviewer estimates, and self-report to assess differential nonresponse in the PRISM study. RESULTS: The E-Tech method had moderate sensitivity (48{\%}) in estimating race of black participants but higher specificity (97{\%}) and positive predictive value (71{\%}). The interviewer-estimation method had high sensitivity (100{\%}), high specificity (95{\%}), and moderate positive predictive value (80{\%}). Black women were less likely than white women to be reached for study participation. CONCLUSION: There was slight differential nonresponse by race in the PRISM study. Techniques described here may be useful for assessing differential nonresponse in samples with incomplete data on race.",
author = "DeFrank, {Jessica T.} and Bowling, {J. Michael} and Rimer, {Barbara K.} and Gierisch, {Jennifer M.} and Skinner, {Celette Sugg}",
year = "2007",
month = "7",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "4",
journal = "Preventing chronic disease",
issn = "1545-1151",
publisher = "U.S. Department of Health and Human Services",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Triangulating differential nonresponse by race in a telephone survey.

AU - DeFrank, Jessica T.

AU - Bowling, J. Michael

AU - Rimer, Barbara K.

AU - Gierisch, Jennifer M.

AU - Skinner, Celette Sugg

PY - 2007/7

Y1 - 2007/7

N2 - INTRODUCTION: In 1994, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services mandated sufficient inclusion of racial and ethnic minorities in all federally funded research. This mandate requires researchers to monitor study samples for research participation and differential survey nonresponse. This study illustrates methods to assess differential survey nonresponse when population race data are incomplete, which is often the case when studies are conducted among members of health plans. METHODS: We collected data as part of the PRISM (Personally Relevant Information about Screening Mammography) study, a trial funded by the National Institutes of Health to increase rates of annual mammography adherence. We used two methods to estimate racial distribution of the PRISM study population. The first method, called E-Tech, estimated race of the sample frame by using individuals' names and zip codes. In the second method, we conducted interviews with a subsample of PRISM study refusals. We validated both estimation methods through comparisons with self-reported race. We used race information generated by E-Tech, interviewer estimates, and self-report to assess differential nonresponse in the PRISM study. RESULTS: The E-Tech method had moderate sensitivity (48%) in estimating race of black participants but higher specificity (97%) and positive predictive value (71%). The interviewer-estimation method had high sensitivity (100%), high specificity (95%), and moderate positive predictive value (80%). Black women were less likely than white women to be reached for study participation. CONCLUSION: There was slight differential nonresponse by race in the PRISM study. Techniques described here may be useful for assessing differential nonresponse in samples with incomplete data on race.

AB - INTRODUCTION: In 1994, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services mandated sufficient inclusion of racial and ethnic minorities in all federally funded research. This mandate requires researchers to monitor study samples for research participation and differential survey nonresponse. This study illustrates methods to assess differential survey nonresponse when population race data are incomplete, which is often the case when studies are conducted among members of health plans. METHODS: We collected data as part of the PRISM (Personally Relevant Information about Screening Mammography) study, a trial funded by the National Institutes of Health to increase rates of annual mammography adherence. We used two methods to estimate racial distribution of the PRISM study population. The first method, called E-Tech, estimated race of the sample frame by using individuals' names and zip codes. In the second method, we conducted interviews with a subsample of PRISM study refusals. We validated both estimation methods through comparisons with self-reported race. We used race information generated by E-Tech, interviewer estimates, and self-report to assess differential nonresponse in the PRISM study. RESULTS: The E-Tech method had moderate sensitivity (48%) in estimating race of black participants but higher specificity (97%) and positive predictive value (71%). The interviewer-estimation method had high sensitivity (100%), high specificity (95%), and moderate positive predictive value (80%). Black women were less likely than white women to be reached for study participation. CONCLUSION: There was slight differential nonresponse by race in the PRISM study. Techniques described here may be useful for assessing differential nonresponse in samples with incomplete data on race.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34447106350&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34447106350&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 4

JO - Preventing chronic disease

JF - Preventing chronic disease

SN - 1545-1151

IS - 3

ER -