Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)) · 2017
[How Representative are Participants of a Parent Survey in the Context of School Entrance Examination].
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wahl Stefanie, Müller-Thur Kathrin, Dragano Nico, Weyers Simone
Аннотация
AIM: In an evaluation study of preventive programmes, the recruitment success of families in difficult socio-economic circumstances was examined during the school entrance examination (SEE).
METHOD: Using a 3-stage recruitment procedure, parents were motivated to participate in the survey. The response rate was calculated for the entire cohort and separately for the single recruitment stages. Non-participants and participants were compared on 4 indicators of difficult socio-economic circumstances.
RESULTS: 52% of the parents participated in the study. The response rate reached 21% for the recruitment stage 'questionnaire with invitation to the SEE', 28% for stage 'personal delivery at the health department' and 4% for stage 'stamped addressed envelope'. Families with low education were more often non-participants (multivariate Odds Ratio (OR) 2.2; 95%-confidence interval (CI) 1.3-3.6). Marginal differences in study participation were present for unemployed families (OR 1.4; CI 0.6-3.2), single parents (OR 1.0; CI 0.6-1.8) and families with immigration background (OR 1.2; CI 0.7-1.5).
CONCLUSION: The response rate was adequate. Personal delivery achieved the highest response rate compared to the other stages. A parent survey at the SEE is a promising approach to access families in difficult socio-economic circumstances. Nevertheless, families with low education are still underrepresented.
METHOD: Using a 3-stage recruitment procedure, parents were motivated to participate in the survey. The response rate was calculated for the entire cohort and separately for the single recruitment stages. Non-participants and participants were compared on 4 indicators of difficult socio-economic circumstances.
RESULTS: 52% of the parents participated in the study. The response rate reached 21% for the recruitment stage 'questionnaire with invitation to the SEE', 28% for stage 'personal delivery at the health department' and 4% for stage 'stamped addressed envelope'. Families with low education were more often non-participants (multivariate Odds Ratio (OR) 2.2; 95%-confidence interval (CI) 1.3-3.6). Marginal differences in study participation were present for unemployed families (OR 1.4; CI 0.6-3.2), single parents (OR 1.0; CI 0.6-1.8) and families with immigration background (OR 1.2; CI 0.7-1.5).
CONCLUSION: The response rate was adequate. Personal delivery achieved the highest response rate compared to the other stages. A parent survey at the SEE is a promising approach to access families in difficult socio-economic circumstances. Nevertheless, families with low education are still underrepresented.