The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Internet Versus Mailed Questionnaires: A Randomized Comparison
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: The use of Internet-based questionnaires for collection of data to evaluate patient education and other interventions has increased in recent years. Many self-report instruments have been validated using paper-and-pencil versions, but we cannot assume that the psychometric properties of an Internet-based version will be identical. OBJECTIVES: To look at similarities and differences between the Internet versions and the paper-and-pencil versions of 16 existing self-report instruments useful in evaluation of patient interventions. METHODS: Participants were recruited via the Internet and volunteered to participate (N=397), after which they were randomly assigned to fill out questionnaires online or via mailed paper-and-pencil versions. The self-report instruments measured were overall health, health distress, practice mental stress management, Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) disability, illness intrusiveness, activity limitations, visual numeric for pain, visual numeric for shortness of breath, visual numeric for fatigue, self-efficacy for managing disease, aerobic exercise, stretching and strengthening exercise, visits to MD, hospitalizations, hospital days, and emergency room visits. Means, ranges, and confidence intervals are given for each instrument within each type of questionnaire. The results from the two questionnaires were compared using both parametric and non-parametric tests. Reliability tests were given for multi-item instruments. A separate sample (N=30) filled out identical questionnaires over the Internet within a few days and correlations were used to assess test-retest reliability. RESULTS: Out of 16 instruments, none showed significant differences when the appropriate tests were used. Construct reliability was similar within each type of questionnaire, and Internet test-retest reliability was high. Internet questionnaires required less follow-up to achieve a slightly (non-significant) higher completion rate compared to mailed questionnaires. CONCLUSIONS: Among a convenience sample recruited via the Internet, results from those randomly assigned to Internet participation were at least as good as, if not better than, among those assigned mailed questionnaires, with less recruitment effort required. The instruments administered via the Internet appear to be reliable, and to be answered similarly to the way they are answered when they are administered via traditional mailed paper questionnaires.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“All measures were administered online, a method which has been shown to be reliable and as valid as traditional paper-and-pencil administration [40,41].”
From Acceptability, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of internet-based exposure treatment for irritable bowel syndrome in a clinical sample: A randomized controlled trial (2011) · cites this paper as [41]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Measurement of patient outcome in arthritis
Fries, J. F., Spitz, P. W., Kraines, R. G., & Holman, H. R. (1980) · Arthritis & Rheumatism · doi:10.1002/art.1780230202 · Cited by 4,404 · cited 1×
“• Health Assessment Instrument measures disability and is used in the National Health Survey (20 items) (Fries et al, 1980) [15].”
MethodGosling, S. D., Vazire, S., Srivastava, S., & John, O. P. (2004) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.59.2.93 · Cited by 2,932 · cited 1×
“However, Gosling et al [19] have argued that Internet samples may actually be more representative than traditional samples.”
BackgroundOutcome Measures for Health Education and Other Health Care Interventions
Lorig, K., Stewart, A., Ritter, P., González, V., Laurent>, D., & Lynch, J. (1996) · doi:10.4135/9781452232966 · Cited by 1,132 · cited 8×
“• Self-reported exercise measures minutes/week of aerobic (5 items) and minutes/week stretching and strengthening exercise (1 item) (Lorig et al, 1996) [12].”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSelf-citationSelf-rated health and mortality in the NHANES I Epidemiologic Follow-up Study
Idler, E. L., & Angel, R. J. (1990) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.80.4.446 · Cited by 864 · cited 1×
“This item comes from the National Health Survey and has been found to be predictive of future health status (Idler & Angel, 1990) [14].”
MethodSocial desirability, anonymity, and internet-based questionnaires
Joinson, A. (1999) · Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers · doi:10.3758/bf03200723 · Cited by 818 · cited 2×
“Joinson (1999) reported that both anonymity and Web usage (compared to paper-and-pencil) resulted in lower scores on a social desirability measure [8].”
BackgroundUsing the Internet for Surveys and Health Research
Eysenbach, G., & Wyatt, J. (2002) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.4.2.e13 · Cited by 790 · cited 2×
“A recent overview entitled “Using the Internet for Surveys and Health Research” (Eysenbach & Wyatt 2002, [10]), barely touched on instruments (referring readers to the Quality of Life Instruments Database at Quality of Life Instruments database [11]) and did not discuss validity or reliability of…”
BackgroundUsing the Internet for psychological research: Personality testing on the World Wide Web
Buchanan, T., & Smith, J. L. (1999) · British Journal of Psychology · doi:10.1348/000712699161189 · Cited by 596 · cited 1×
“Buchanan and Smith (1999) [5] compared a Web-based personality assessment to a paper-and-pencil version, and using confirmatory factor analyses, found similar psychometric properties in the two tests.”
MethodSelf-reports of health care utilization compared to provider records
Ritter, P. L., Stewart, A. L., Kaymaz, H., Sobel, D. S., Block, D. A., & Lorig, K. R. (2001) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/s0895-4356(00)00261-4 · Cited by 401 · cited 1×
“• Health care utilization (MD visits, hospitalization, hospital days, ER visits) (Lorig et al, 1996; Ritter et al, 2001) [12,18].”
Self-citationThe Use of the Internet in Psychological Research: Comparison of Online and Offline Questionnaires
Riva, G., Teruzzi, T., & Anolli, L. (2003) · CyberPsychology & Behavior · doi:10.1089/109493103321167983 · Cited by 304 · cited 2×
“Joinson (1999) reported that both anonymity and Web usage (compared to paper-and-pencil) resulted in lower scores on a social desirability measure [8].”
BackgroundWeb-based administration of a personality questionnaire: Comparison with traditional methods
Davis, R. N. (1999) · Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers · doi:10.3758/bf03200737 · Cited by 226 · cited 2×
“Davis (1999) [6] also compared Web and paper-and-pencil versions of a personality measure (rumination), and concluded that “findings from Web-based questionnaire research are comparable with results obtained using standard procedures.””
Result
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Lin, C, 2003, Proc AMIA Symp, 911
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Eysenbach, G. (2004) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.6.3.e34 · Cited by 6,480
“In this issue of the Journal of Medical Internet Research we publish two methodological studies exploring the characteristics of Web-based surveys compared to mail-based surveys [1,2].”
BackgroundA guide for the design and conduct of self-administered surveys of clinicians
Burns, K. E. A., Duffett, M., Kho, M. E., Meade, M., Adhikari, N. K. J., Sinuff, T., Cook, D. J., & for the ACCADEMY Group (2008) · Canadian Medical Association Journal · doi:10.1503/cmaj.080372 · Cited by 1,357
Comparing Response Rates from Web and Mail Surveys: A Meta-Analysis
Shih, T.-H., & Fan, X. (2008) · Field Methods · doi:10.1177/1525822x08317085 · Cited by 1,159
The QCAE: a questionnaire of cognitive and affective empathy
Reniers, R. L. E. P., Corcoran, R., Drake, R., Shryane, N. M., & Völlm, B. A. (2011) · Journal of Personality Assessment · doi:10.1080/00223891.2010.528484 · Cited by 961
“However, research has shown that questionnaires administered via the Internet are reliable and are answered in the same way as when they are administered via traditional mailed paper questionnaires ( Ritter, Lorig, Laurent, & Matthews, 2004 ; Riva, Teruzzi, & Anolli, 2003 ).”
BackgroundBiddiss, E. A., & Chau, T. T. (2007) · American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation · doi:10.1097/phm.0b013e3181587f6c · Cited by 647
“) have been demonstrated.(22,25) However, it is important to recognize the possible sampling biases inherent to the results presented herein.”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Ritter, P., Lorig, K., Laurent, D., & Matthews, K.
- Affiliations
- Stanford Medicine (US)
- Stanford University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Ritter, Philip
- Venue
- Journal of Medical Internet Research
- Publisher
- JMIR Publications Inc.
- Published
- 2004-09-15
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- e29
- ISSN
- 1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC1550608
- OpenAlex
- W2072139531
- Cited by
- 427
- References
- 16
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 29 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 27 · 2012: 35
- FWCI
- 69.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Journal of Medical Internet Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- TSpace (University of Toronto) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Research and Theory › Health Education and Validation
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
- Keywords
- internet-based questionnaire, mail surveys, self-report measures, psychometric properties, test-retest reliability, construct reliability, questionnaire completion rates, patient education evaluation, patient-reported outcomes
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Postal Service, Surveys and Questionnaires, Random Allocation, Internet
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
