Self-Reported Interest to Participate in a Health Survey if Different Amounts of Cash or Non-Monetary Incentive Types Were Offered
- 18 Downloads
The objective of this study was to assess monetary and non-monetary factors that can influence the decision to participate in a future health survey. A questionnaire was administered to eligible, low-income participants (n = 1502) of the 2012 Los Angeles County Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (LAHANES-II). Multivariable regression analyses were performed to describe factors potentially associated with future intent to participate in similar survey designs. The results of the survey suggest that, overall, female participants had a greater interest in participating under a variety of incentive scenarios. Compared to the 25–34 age group, older participants (35–44, 45–84) reported more interest to participate if $10 cash [prepaid gift/debit card], a coupon for product/travel, or a small item [e.g., granola bar, t-shirt, pen] was offered, whereas younger participants (18–24) reported greater interest for $25 cash or a coupon for product/travel. Non-Whites, when compared to Whites/Non-Hispanics, reported greater interest to participate if any of the incentives was offered. High school graduates, when compared to those with some college education, reported greater interest to participate if $10 cash, a small item, or a lottery ticket was offered. Presence of two or more chronic conditions increased interest while concerns about participation in LAHANES-II was associated with reduced interest to participate in future health-related surveys. The results suggest that both incentives and non-monetary considerations (e.g., personal concerns about participating and individual level characteristics) can influence the decision to participate in health-related surveys and offer insights into strategies that can improve response rates for these assessments that are often used to inform community planning.
KeywordsSurvey incentives Health survey Health assessment Response rates
The authors thank Elizabeth Rubin, Ashley Stegall, Ekaterina Gee, Delia Bedair, Jerome Blake, Heena Hameed, Brenda Robles, Susie Tang, Frank Sorvillo, Deborah Davenport, Angel Aquino, Rachel Lee, Elaine Massengill, Violet Williams, David Caley, the CHS Administration and the Area Health Officers for their assistance in facilitating the LAHANES-II data collection. The authors also thank Leila Family for reviewing the manuscript prior to submission. This study utilized information from a project that was previously supported in part by a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention initiative (3U58DP002485-01S1). No funding was received for this analysis.
- 3.Kamb ML, Rhodes F, Hoxworth T, Rogers J, Lentz A, Kent C, et al. What about money? Effect of small monetary incentives on enrollment, retention, and motivation to change behaviour in an HIV/STD prevention counselling intervention. The project RESPECT study group. Sex Transm Infect. 1998;74(4):253–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 13.Siedner MJ, Santorino D, Lankowski AJ, Kanyesigye M, Bwana MB, Haberer JE, et al. A combination SMS and transportation reimbursement intervention to improve HIV care following abnormal CD4 test results in rural Uganda: a prospective observational cohort study. BMC Med. 2015;13:160.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 14.CDC/National Center for Health Statistics. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/participant.htm#benefits. Accessed Nov 2015.
- 15.CDC/National Center for Health Statistics. NHANES Response Rates and Population Totals. [Web]. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/response_rates_cps.htm. Accessed 2 Nov 2015.
- 16.CDC/National Center for Health Statistics. 2011–2012 NHANES Response Rates. [Web]. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhanes/response_rates_cps/rrt1112.pdf. Accessed 4 Apr 2016.
- 17.Office of Health Assessment and Epidemiology. 2011 Los Angeles County Health Survey Background Summary & Methodology. Los Angeles, CA: Los Angeles County Department of Public Health 2013.Google Scholar
- 18.Los Angeles County Department of Public Health. Key indicators of health by service planning area. Los Angeles, CA: Los Angeles County Department of Public Health; 2011. p. 2013.Google Scholar
- 21.California Health Interview Survey. CHIS 2011–2012 methodology series: report 4—response rates. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Center for Health Policy Research; 2014.Google Scholar
- 23.Maternal Child and Adolescent Health Programs. Los Angeles Mommy and Baby (LAMB) Project, First 5 LA 14 Best Start Community Report, 2010 and 2012. Los Angeles County Department of Public Health, 2014.Google Scholar
- 24.CDC/Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. BRFSS Combined Landline and Cell Phone Weighted Response Rates by State, 2011. Annual Survey Data 2011; http://www.cdc.gov/brfss/annual_data/2011/response_rates_11.htm. Accessed Apr 2016.
- 27.Los Angeles County Department of Public Health/Abt SRBI. 2011 Los Angeles County health survey methodology report. Los Angeles County Department of Public Health; June 2011 2011.Google Scholar
- 28.Zipf G, Chiappa, M, Porter, KS, et al. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey: Plan and operations, 1999–2010. National Center for Health Statistics. Vital Health Stat. 2013;1(56):1–37Google Scholar
- 29.CDC/National Center for Health Statistics. 2009–2010 NHANES Response Rates. Los Angeles, CA: Los Angeles County Department of Public Health. [Web]. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhanes/response_rates_cps/RRT0910.pdf. Accessed 2 Nov 2015.
- 32.Reyes BCJ. A portrait of race and ethnicity in California: an assessment of social and economic well-being. San Francisco, CA: Public Policy Institute of California; 2001.Google Scholar
- 34.SAS statistical software. [computer program]. Cary, North Carolina 2006.Google Scholar
- 35.Penslar R. Incentives for participation. In: Porter J, ed. Institutional Review Board Guidebook: Office for Human Research Protection from Research Risks. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh; 1993.Google Scholar