Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Oct;54(5):1016-1022.
doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.13172. Epub 2019 May 31.

The effects of survey version on patient experience scores and plan rankings

Affiliations

The effects of survey version on patient experience scores and plan rankings

Megan K Beckett et al. Health Serv Res. 2019 Oct.

Abstract

Objective: To assess the effect of changing survey questions on plan-level patient experience measures and ratings.

Data source: 2015 Medicare Advantage CAHPS Survey respondents.

Study design: Ninety three randomly selected beneficiaries in each of 40 MA plans received a revised (5.0) CAHPS survey; 38 832 beneficiaries received version 4.0. Linear mixed-effect regression predicted CAHPS measures from fixed effects for survey version and beneficiary characteristics and random effects for plan and plan-by-version random slope.

Principal findings: Response rates were 42 percent for both versions. Removal of "try to" from screeners increased the percentage of respondents eligible for follow-up questions. Version 5.0 caused a small increase (1-3 points on a 0-100 scale, P < 0.05) in the mean of three altered measures and a moderate increase (>3 points) in one. There was a small statistically significant increase in two unaltered measures. These changes were uniform across plans, so there would be no expected change compared to results using the legacy survey in the score distributions other than uniform mean shifts, and no expected effect on summary measures.

Conclusions: These analyses illustrate how to assess the impact of seemingly minor survey modifications for other national surveys considering changes and highlight the importance of screeners in instrument design.

Keywords: Medicare; patient; survey research and questionnaire design.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

All authors have no potential conflicts of interest.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Tourangeau R. Recurring Surveys: Issues and Opportunities A Report to the National Science Foundation Based on a Workshop Held on March 28–29, 2003. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation; 2003.
    1. Sudman S, Bradburn NM, Scwarz N. Thinking About Answers: The Application of Cognitive Processes to Survey Methodology. Hoboken, NJ: Jossey‐Bass; 2010.
    1. Schwarz N. Self‐reports: How the questions shape the answers. Am Psychol. 1999;54(2):93‐105.
    1. Tourangeau R, Rips LJ, Rasinski K. The Psychology of Survey Response. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2000.
    1. Kahneman D, Tversky A. Choices, values, and frames. Am Psychol. 1984;39(4):341‐350.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources