Back to Journals » Advances in Medical Education and Practice » Volume 11

Quality and Impact of Survey Research Among Anesthesiologists: A Systematic Review

Authors Geyer ED, Miller R, Kim SS, Tobias JD, Nafiu OO, Tumin D

Received 25 April 2020

Accepted for publication 24 July 2020

Published 25 August 2020 Volume 2020:11 Pages 587—599


Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single anonymous peer review

Peer reviewer comments 2

Editor who approved publication: Dr Md Anwarul Azim Majumder

Emily D Geyer,1 Rebecca Miller,1 Stephani S Kim,1 Joseph D Tobias,1,2 Olubukola O Nafiu,1 Dmitry Tumin3

1Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Nationwide Children’s Hospital, Columbus, OH, USA; 2Department of Anesthesiology & Pain Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA; 3Department of Pediatrics, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC, USA

Correspondence: Stephani S Kim Kim
Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Nationwide Children’s Hospital, 700 Children’s Drive, Columbus, OH 43205, USA
Tel +1 614 722-2675
Fax +1 614 722-4203

Abstract: New technology has facilitated survey research of anesthesia professional society members. We evaluated prevailing metrics of quality and impact of published research studies based on surveys of anesthesiologists. We hypothesized that adherence to recommended practices (such as use of reminders) would be associated with increased survey response rates, and that higher response rates would be associated with higher article impact. Using the MEDLINE database, we identified 45 English-language research articles published in 2010– 2017 reporting original data from surveys of anesthesiologists. The median response rate was 37% (IQR: 25– 46%). Recommended survey practices, including the use of reminders (p = 0.861) and validated questionnaires (p = 0.719), were not correlated with response rates. In turn, survey response rates were not associated with measures of article impact (p = 0.528). The impact of published research based on surveys of anesthesiologists, as measured by citation scores (p = 0.493) and Altmetrics (p = 0.826), may be driven primarily by the novel data or questions raised using survey methodology, but does not appear to be associated with response rates. Improving reporting of survey methodology and understanding possible sources of non-response bias are important for future studies in this area.

Keywords: survey methodology, anesthesiologist, response rate, survey research, systematic review

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]