The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Survey research in neuropsychology: A systematic review
Abstract
Objective: This systematic review paper summarizes the research in neuropsychology using survey methodology, tallies key design features of published survey studies, and evaluates the degree to which the survey methods are disclosed in these publications.Method: We conducted a systematic review of neuropsychological studies that used survey methodology using PRISMA guidelines. We rated 89 surveys on the American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) required disclosure items and quality indicators.Results: Following the AAPOR guidelines for survey disclosure and quality, we found only fair to good compliance with disclosure requirements, with the average article reporting 73% of the required elements of method. Rates of disclosure of required items went up after the year 2000 but then dropped back somewhat after 2010. We also found a decrease in survey response rates over time.Conclusions: Most of the surveys published concern practice patterns and trends in the field. Response rates have gone down, as is common in other surveys. There is room for improvement in disclosure practices in survey articles in neuropsychology. We provide a rubric for evaluating disclosure of methods, to guide researchers who want to use surveys in their neuropsychological research, as well as guide consumers of survey research.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Similar concerns regarding the qualities of surveys have been raised in other medical fields.
“Similar concerns regarding the qualities of surveys have been raised in other medical fields. 28 -33”
From A Consensus-Based Checklist for Reporting of Survey Studies (CROSS) (2021) · cites this paper as [29]
Citations
Cites
Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science
Open Science Collaboration (2015) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aac4716 · Cited by 8,515
STARD 2015: an updated list of essential items for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies
Bossuyt, P. M., Reitsma, J. B., Bruns, D. E., Gatsonis, C. A., Glasziou, P. P., Irwig, L., Lijmer, J. G., Moher, D., Rennie, D., de Vet, H. C. W., et al. (2015) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.h5527 · Cited by 3,660
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 112
- 10.1111/j.1742-9544.2010.00002.x · DOI
- 10.1037/0003-066X.57.12.1060 · DOI · Paper page
- Barker-Collo S., 2015, New Zealand Journal of Psychology, 44, 35
- 10.1037/rep0000045 · DOI
- 10.1080/13854046.2012.758780 · DOI
- 10.1080/13854046.2013.854836 · DOI
- 10.1093/arclin/acx002 · DOI
- 10.1080/13854040600888784 · DOI
- 10.3109/02699052.2013.775504 · DOI
- 10.1080/13803395.2013.826182 · DOI
- 10.1076/clin.16.3.221.13847 · DOI
- 10.1080/09297049.215.1075491 · DOI
- 10.1037/0735-7028.31.2.141 · DOI
- 10.1080/13854049308401521 · DOI
- 10.1080/09602010042000169 · DOI
- 10.1093/arclin/act073 · DOI
- 10.1080/02699050400000565 · DOI
- 10.1080/13854048908404070 · DOI
- 10.1093/arclin/acq004 · DOI
- Dillman D. A., 2014, Internet, phone, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: The tailored design method, 10.1002/9781394260645 · DOI
- 10.1076/clin.15.2.137.1893 · DOI
- 10.1076/clin.15.2.150.1902 · DOI
- 10.1076/clin.16.4.413.13906 · DOI
- 10.29115/SP-2016-0017 · DOI
- 10.1207/s15324826an1101_2 · DOI
- 10.1080/13854049708400451 · DOI
- 10.1080/13854046.2016.1237675 · DOI
- 10.1037/0090-5550.40.3.223 · DOI
- 10.1037/0090-5550.40.3.223 · DOI
- 10.1080/13854046.2016.1197313 · DOI
- 10.21500/20112084.2101 · DOI
- 10.1509/jppm.2005.24.2.234 · DOI
- 10.1080/02699050701559558 · DOI
- 10.1136/bcr-2013-201554 · DOI
- 10.1093/poq/nfn011 · DOI
- 10.1037/0735-7028.22.1.80 · DOI
- 10.1016/0887-6177(90)90016-I · DOI
- 10.1080/13854046.2019.1590642 · DOI
- Hartlage L. C., 1980, Clinical Neuropsychology, 2, 200
- 10.1093/arclin/acx009 · DOI
- Jones G. T., 2001, Georgia State University Law Review, 18, 721
- 10.1192/pb.bp.108.022517 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.acn.2004.09.002 · DOI
- 10.1080/13854046.2015.1134670 · DOI
- 10.1037/a0028161 · DOI
- 10.1093/arclin/acu038 · DOI
- Leavell C., 1988, School Psychology Review, 17, 147, 10.1080/02796015.1988.12085333 · DOI
- 10.1177/147078530805000107 · DOI
- 10.1080/13854046.2015.1087597 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1468-1331.2010.03134.x · DOI
- 10.1016/0887-6177(95)00057-7 · DOI
- 10.1080/13854040802665790 · DOI
- 10.1037/a0036318 · DOI
- 10.1080/13854048808520102 · DOI
- 10.3109/02699059409150994 · DOI
- 10.1076/1385-4046(200002)14:1;1-8;FT001 · DOI
- 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1007/s10979-009-9214-8 · DOI
- 10.1080/15381500802006771 · DOI
- 10.1080/13854046.2016.1183049 · DOI
- 10.1093/arclin/acv026 · DOI
- 10.1080/13854048908403283 · DOI
- 10.1080/13854049408401541 · DOI
- 10.1080/13854049008401906 · DOI
- 10.1080/13854049108403296 · DOI
- 10.1080/13854049408404134 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.acn.2004.02.005 · DOI
- 10.1080/09084280701719161 · DOI
- 10.1080/09084280802325090 · DOI
- 10.1080/13854040600888776 · DOI
- 10.1093/arclin/acw007 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1037/a0037987 · DOI
- Randver R., 2015, Baltic Journal of Psychology, 11, 72
- 10.1002/1097-4679(199209)48:5 < 666::AID-JCLP2270480514 > 3.0.CO;2-J · DOI
- Roper B. L., 2012, Neuropsychological practice with veterans, 281
- 10.1177/0011000099273007 · DOI
- 10.1093/arclin/acv047.288 · DOI
- 10.1080/13854046.2014.934020 · DOI
- 10.1080/13854046.2016.1177118 · DOI
- Schulz K. F., 2010, Open Medicine, 4, e60
- 10.1037/0003-066X.54.2.93 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1300/J294v11n03_10 · DOI
- 10.1093/arclin/1.1.5 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.acn.2006.12.004 · DOI
- 10.1002/1097-4679(198010)36:4<1035::AID-JCLP2270360439>3.0.CO;2-E · DOI
- 10.1080/13854046.2014.942373 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.acn.2003.04.001 · DOI
- 10.1177/1073191107302842 · DOI
- 10.1176/jnp.8.2.181 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1076/clin.17.1.34.15625 · DOI
- 10.1037/rep0000071 · DOI
- 10.1076/jcen.26.2.291.28078 · DOI
- 10.1080/13854046.2016.1140228 · DOI
- 10.1080/13854046.2010.544165 · DOI
- 10.1080/13854049008401504 · DOI
- 10.1076/1385-4046(200002)14:1;1-8;FT018 · DOI
- 10.1080/13854049608406681 · DOI
- 10.1080/13854040600760488 · DOI
- 10.1076/clin.16.2.109.13237 · DOI
- 10.1080/13854046.2012.705565 · DOI
- 10.1080/13854046.2012.699102 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.acn.2006.05.002 · DOI
- 10.1037/0735-7028.20.4.248 · DOI
- Tourangeau R., 2013, Nonresponse in social science surveys: A research agenda
- 10.1017/CBO9780511819322 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.ypmed.2007.08.012 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1076/chin.5.2.137.3168 · DOI
- 10.1080/13854040500519745 · DOI
- 10.1080/13854046.2016.1196731 · DOI
- 10.3109/02699052.2010.495697 · DOI
- 10.1111/ap.12061 · DOI
- 10.1080/13854046.2016.1159730 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A Consensus-Based Checklist for Reporting of Survey Studies (CROSS)
Sharma, A., Minh Duc, N. T., Luu Lam Thang, T., Nam, N. H., Ng, S. J., Abbas, K. S., Huy, N. T., Marušić, A., Paul, C. L., Kwok, J., et al. (2021) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11606-021-06737-1 · Cited by 2,292
Metadata
- Authors
- Marcopulos, B. A., Guterbock, T. M., & Matusz, E. F.
- Affiliations
- James Madison University (US)
- University of Virginia (US)
- Corresponding author
- Marcopulos, Bernice a.
- Venue
- The Clinical Neuropsychologist
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2019-05-28
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 32-55
- ISSN
- 0920-1637 (ISSN-L)
- 1385-4046
- 1744-4144
- OpenAlex
- W2947700284
- Cited by
- 24
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 6
- FWCI
- 0.95
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The Clinical Neuropsychologist (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychology Research and Bibliometrics
- Keywords
- survey research, neuropsychology, survey response rates, clinical practice patterns
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Neuropsychological Tests, Neuropsychology, Surveys and Questionnaires, Research Design
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review