Display options
Share it on

AIMS Public Health. 2015 Jun 02;2(2):210-217. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2015.2.210. eCollection 2015.

Summary of the Impact of the Inclusion of Mobile Phone Numbers into the NSW Population Health Survey in 2012.

AIMS public health

Margo Barr, Raymond Ferguson, Jason van Ritten, Phil Hughes, David Steel

Affiliations

  1. Centre for Epidemiology and Evidence, NSW Ministry of Health, 73 Miller Street, North Sydney, NSW 2060, Australia.
  2. National Institute for Applied Statistics Research, University of Wollongong, NSW 2522, Australia.

PMID: 29546105 PMCID: PMC5690277 DOI: 10.3934/publichealth.2015.2.210

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although it was estimated that 20% of the population in Australia were mobile-only phone users in 2010, the inclusion of mobile numbers into computer-assisted telephone interviews (CATI) behavioural risk factor surveys did not occur until 2012.

METHODS: Three papers have been published describing the methods, weighting strategy and the impact in detail of including mobile numbers into the NSW Population Health Survey (NSWPHS). This paper identifies the important components of those papers and summarises them for a broader audience.

RESULTS: In the 2012 NSWPHS, 15,214 (15,149 with weights) interviews were completed (64% landline frame; 36% mobile frame). Response, cooperation and contact rates were 37%, 65% and 69% respectively. The inclusion of mobile phone numbers resulted in a sample that was closer to the NSW population profile and impacted on the time series of estimates for alcohol drinking, recommended fruit consumption, current smoking, and overweight or obesity.

CONCLUSIONS: The papers found that including mobile phone numbers into NSWPHS did not impact negatively on response rates or data collection, but it did cost more and affect the time series for some behavioural risk factors, in that it corrected the estimates that had been produced from a sample frame that was progressively getting less representative of the population.

Keywords: CATI survey; mobile phone; overlapping dual-frame

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

  1. BMC Res Notes. 2014 Aug 12;7:517 - PubMed
  2. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013 Mar 16;13:41 - PubMed
  3. BMJ. 2003 Jan 25;326(7382):219 - PubMed
  4. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014 Sep 04;14:102 - PubMed
  5. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012 Nov 22;12:177 - PubMed

Publication Types