首页> 外文期刊>British Medical Journal >Commentary: an opposing view from the Netherlands
【24h】

Commentary: an opposing view from the Netherlands

机译:评论:荷兰的反对意见

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Dutch general practitioners receive similar excessive amounts of mail and are as overworked as their British colleagues—we like to think more so. But we are much more willing to answer questionnaires from our colleagues. Why should this be? Are we nicer, more obsessional, more anxious to express an option? Are we more supportive of research in general practice? Do we get paid for responding? The most important factors that determine the response rate to a questionnaire in any country are its subject, length, and quality, together with the "face" it presents. The Midlands study referred to by McAvoy and Kaner dealt with sensitive or perhaps even irritating subjects: general practitioners' attitudes to preventive medicine and to interventions about patients' alcohol use. Questionnaires about issues such as alcohol, ethics, yearly earnings, working hours, attitudes to genitourinary disease, or any subject that makes a general practitioner feel the need to make major changes in the way he or she works tread the same dangerous ground. A survey by our department of 494 Dutch general practitioners' attitudes to alcohol issues had the same low initial response rate, and three written reminders (compared with none in the Midlands study) improved the response rate to only 51%.
机译:荷兰全科医生收到的邮件数量类似,也超过了英国同事的工作量,因此我们想得更多。但是我们更愿意回答同事的问卷。为什么会这样呢?我们是否更好,更痴迷,更渴望表达一种选择?我们是否更支持一般实践中的研究?我们会因回应而获得报酬吗?在任何国家/地区中,决定问卷答复率的最重要因素是问卷的主题,篇幅和质量以及所呈现的“面孔”。麦卡沃伊(McAvoy)和坎纳(Kaner)提到的米德兰兹(Midlands)研究涉及敏感甚至恼人的受试者:全科医生对预防医学的态度以及对患者饮酒的干预措施。有关酒精,道德,年收入,工作时间,对泌尿生殖系统疾病的态度等问题的问卷,或任何使全科医生感到有必要在其工作方式上做出重大改变以承担同样危险理由的主题。我们部门对494名荷兰全科医生对酒精问题的态度进行的调查显示,初始反应率同样较低,而三项书面提醒(与Midlands研究相比没有一项)使回应率仅提高了51%。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号