Cost-Effectiveness of a Lottery for Increasing Physicians’ Responses to a Mail Survey
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a lottery on physicians' responses to a mail survey, a randomized controlled trial was conducted with a random sample of 1,000 members of the Quebec Federation of General Practitioners in 1997. For the first mailing of this survey, each respondent was randomly assigned to the control or experimental group, which was offered participation in a lottery upon return of the questionnaire. Response rate was 41.2% in the experimental group and 34.8% in the control group, a 6.4% difference (CI95%: 0.6%-12.6%). The additional cost of the lottery was about Can$500, giving an incremental cost of Can$16 per questionnaire returned. In conclusion, a lottery resulted in a small but statistically significant increase in the response rate of physicians to a mail survey. This method may be a cost-effective option when applied to large surveys.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.351 | 0.101 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it