The nurse perspective is critical in survey research investigating various aspects of healthcare services, staff, and patient outcomes. Researchers are responsible for ensuring that survey research utilizing survey questionnaires employs research methodological strategies that are aligned with the ethical principles of beneficence, respect for persons, and justice. The purpose of this paper is to discuss best practices to facilitate high-quality survey data collection for nurse survey participants. Recommendations are based on the fundamental ethical principles described in the Belmont Report, an overview of evidence published in the current literature, and the application of practical knowledge. Literature searches conducted in PubMed resulted in the inclusion of over 50 articles from a wide range of disciplines. The results include actionable methods for researchers to consider and follow when conducting survey research utilizing nurse participants. This article serves as a resource to guide researchers through ethically responsible design, implementation, and reporting of nurse survey research.
CheckJSchuttRK. Survey Research. Research methods in education. 1 Oliver’s Yard, 55 City Road London EC1Y 1SP: SAGE Publications, Inc.; 2012. pp. 159–186.
2.
KelleyK. Good practice in the conduct and reporting of survey research. Int J Qual Health Care2003; 15: 261–266.
AikenLHSermeusWVan den HeedeK, et al.Patient safety, satisfaction, and quality of hospital care: cross sectional surveys of nurses and patients in 12 countries in Europe and the United States. Br Med J2012; 344: e1717.
5.
Nelson-BrantleyHVParkSHBergquist-BeringerS. Characteristics of the nursing practice environment associated with lower unit-level RN turnover. J Nurs Adm2018; 48: 31–37.
ShamooAEResnikDB. Responsible Conduct of Research. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015.
12.
The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. The Belmont Report: Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research [Internet]. HHS: Office for Human Research Protections. 1979 [cited 2020 Apr 21]. Available from: https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/belmont-report/read-the-belmont-report/index.html
13.
FriesenPKearnsLRedmanB,et al.Rethinking the Belmont report?Am J Bioeth2017; 17: 15–21.
14.
LavrakasP. Survey Ethics. Encyclopedia of survey research methods. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks California 91320 United States of America: Sage Publications, Inc.; 2008.
15.
PolitDFPDBeckCT. Nursing Research: Generating and Assessing Evidence for Nursing Practice. 10th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2017.
De VausD. Surveys in Social Research. 5th ed. London: University College London Press, 2002.
22.
LabottSMJohnsonTPFendrichM,et al.Emotional risks to respondents in survey research. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics2013; 8: 53–66.
23.
MurdochMKehle-ForbesSMPartinMRChanges in affect after completing a mailed survey about trauma: two pre- and post-test studies in former disability applicants for posttraumatic stress disorder. BMC Med Res Methodol2017; 17: 81.
ESOMAR. ESOMAR/GRBN Guideline for Online Sample Quality. ESOMAR World Research, 2015. Available from: https://www.esomar.org/uploads/public/knowledge-and-standards/codes-and-guidelines/ESOMAR-GRBN_Online-Sample-Quality-Guideline_February-2015.pdf
26.
LukEKRoseL. Conducting a large survey of critical care nurses in Canada: lessons learnt. Intensive Crit Care Nurs2011; 27: 173–179.
27.
SmythJDDillmanDAChristianLM,et al.Using the internet to survey small towns and communities: limitations and possibilities in the early 21st century. Am Behav Sci2010; 53: 1423–1448.
28.
DraugalisJRPlazaCM. Best practices for survey research reports revisited: implications of target population, probability sampling, and response rate. Am J Pharm Educ2009; 73: 142.
29.
KrejcieRVMorganDW. Determining sample size for research activities. Educ Psychol Meas1970; 30: 607–610.
30.
BuddenJSZhongEHMoultonP,et al.Highlights of the national workforce survey of registered nurses. J Nurs Regul2013; 4: 5–14.
31.
LewisEFHardyMSnaithB. Estimating the effect of nonresponse bias in a survey of hospital organizations. Eval Health Prof2013; 36: 330–351.
32.
FinchamJE. Response rates and responsiveness for surveys, standards, and the journal. Am J Pharm Educ2008; 72: 43.
33.
SingerEBossarteRM. Incentives for survey participation when are they “coercive”?Am J Prev Med2006; 31: 411–418.
34.
EdwardsPJRobertsIClarkeMJ, et al.Methods to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2009; 3: MR000008.
35.
ThorpeCRyanBMcLeanSL, et al.How to obtain excellent response rates when surveying physicians. Fam Pract2009; 26: 65–68.
36.
OlsenFAbelsenBOlsenJA. Improving response rate and quality of survey data with a scratch lottery ticket incentive. BMC Med Res Methodol2012; 12: 52.
37.
KalischBJTschannenDLeeH,et al.Hospital variation in missed nursing care. Am J Med Qual2011; 26: 291–299.
38.
WakimN. Occupational stressors, stress perception levels, and coping styles of medical surgical RNs: a generational perspective. J Nurs Adm2014; 44: 632–639.
39.
HunterL. Challenging the reported disadvantages of e-questionnaires and addressing methodological issues of online data collection. Nurse Res2012; 20: 11–20.
DillmanDASmythJDChristianLM. Internet, Phone, Mail, and Mixed-Mode Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2014.
47.
MarcusBBosnjakMLindnerS,et al.Compensating for low topic interest and long surveys. Soc Sci Comput Rev2007; 25: 372–383.
48.
SahlqvistSSongYBullF, et al.Effect of questionnaire length, personalization and reminder type on response rate to a complex postal survey: randomized controlled trial. BMC Med Res Methodol2011; 11: 62.
BradburnNMSudmanSBlairE, et al.Improving Interview Method and Questionnaire Design: Response Effects to Threatening Questions in Survey Research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1979.
51.
GraesserAC. Question understanding aid (QUAID): a web facility that tests question comprehensibility. Public Opin Q2006; 70: 3–22.
52.
Sinkowitz-CochranRL. Survey design: to ask or not to ask? That is the question. Clin Infect Dis2013; 56: 1159–1164.
53.
LaDonnaKATaylorTLingardL. Why open-ended survey questions are unlikely to support rigorous qualitative insights. Acad Med2018; 93: 347–349.
54.
LloydKDevineP. The inclusion of open-ended questions on quantitative surveys of children: dealing with unanticipated responses relating to child abuse and neglect. Child Abuse Negl2015; 48: 200–207.
55.
SchumanHScottJ. Problems in the use of survey questions to measure public opinion. Science1987; 236: 957–959.
56.
TourangeauRYanT. Sensitive questions in surveys. Psychol Bull2007; 133: 859–883.
57.
CromerLDFreydJJBinderAK,et al.What’s the risk in asking? Participant reaction to trauma history questions compared with reaction to other personal questions. Ethics Behav2006; 16: 347–362.
58.
HoddinottSNBassMJ. The Dillman total design survey method. Can Fam Physician1986; 32: 2366–2368.
59.
SiedleckiSLButlerRSBurchillCN. Survey design research: a tool for answering nursing research questions. Clin Nurse Spec2015; 29: E1–E8.
60.
BainesADPartinMRDavernM,et al.Mixed-mode administration reduced bias and enhanced poststratification adjustments in a health behavior survey. J Clin Epidemiol2007; 60: 1246–1255.
61.
HalbeslebenJRBWhitmanMV. Evaluating survey quality in health services research: a decision framework for assessing nonresponse bias. Health Serv Res2013; 48: 913–930.
62.
HallEWSanchezTHSteinAD, et al.Use of videos improves informed consent comprehension in web-based surveys among internet-using men who have sex with men: a randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res2017; 19: e64.
63.
AbdulazizKBrehautJTaljaardM, et al.National survey of physicians to determine the effect of unconditional incentives on response rates of physician postal surveys. BMJ Open2015; 5: e007166.
64.
AvdeyevaOAMatlandRE. An experimental test of mail surveys as a tool for social inquiry in Russia. Int J Public Opin Res2013; 25: 173–194.
65.
NoelHHuangAR. The effect of varying incentive amounts on physician survey response. Eval Health Prof2018; 42: 71–81.
66.
SmithMGWitteMRochaS,et al.Effectiveness of incentives and follow-up on increasing survey response rates and participation in field studies. BMC Med Res Methodol2019; 19: 230.
67.
FadenRRBeauchampTL. A History and Theory of Informed Consent. New York: Oxford University Press, 1986.
68.
BrodnikM SRinehart-ThompsonL AReynoldsRB. Fundamentals of law for health informatics and information management. Fundamentals of law for health informatics and information management. 2017.
69.
RittaseMKirklandEDudasDM,et al.Survey item response rates by survey modality, language, and sociodemographic factors in a large U.S. Cohort. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev2020; 29: 724–730.
70.
ZazpeISantiagoSDe la Fuente-ArrillagaC, et al.Paper-Based versus Web-based versions of self-administered questionnaires, including food-frequency questionnaires: prospective cohort study. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2019;5:e11997.
71.
BuskirkTDAndrusC. Smart surveys for smartphones: exploring various approaches for conducting online mobile surveys via smartphones. Surv Pract2012; 5: 1–11.
72.
CallegaroM. Do you know which device your respondent has used to take your online survey?Surv Pract2010; 3: 1–12.
73.
de BruijneMWijnantA. Can mobile web surveys be taken on computers? A discussion on a multi-device survey design. Surv Pract2013; 6: 1–8.
74.
MillarMMDillmanDA. Encouraging survey response via smartphones. Surv Pract2012; 5: 1–6.
75.
DillmanDAPhelpsGTortoraR, et al.Response rate and measurement differences in mixed-mode surveys using mail, telephone, interactive voice response (IVR) and the internet. Soc Sci Res2009; 38: 1–18.
76.
MlikoticRParkerBRajapaksheR. Assessing the effects of participant preference and demographics in the usage of web-based survey questionnaires by women attending screening mammography in British Columbia. J Med Internet Res2016; 18: e70.
77.
SchleyerTKForrestJL. Methods for the design and administration of web-based surveys. J Am Med Inform Assoc2000; 7: 416–425.
78.
EysenbachG. Improving the quality of Web surveys: the checklist for reporting results of internet E-surveys (CHERRIES). J Med Internet Res2004; 6: e34.
79.
FishJNRussellSTHave mischievous responders misidentified sexual minority youth disparities in the national longitudinal study of adolescent to adult health?Arch Sex Behav2018; 47: 1053–1067.
80.
FronekPBriggsL. Faking participant identity: vested interests and purposeful interference. Res Ethics2017; 14: 1–5.
81.
KramerJRubinACosterW, et al.Strategies to address participant misrepresentation for eligibility in Web-based research. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res2014; 23: 120–129.
82.
Robinson-CimpianJP. Inaccurate estimation of disparities due to mischievous responders: several suggestions to assess conclusions. Edu Res2014; 43: 171–185.
83.
Sharpe WesslingKHuberJNetzerO. Mturk character misrepresentation: assessment and solutions. J Consumer Res2017; 44: 211–230.
84.
MeadeAWPappalardoG. Predicting careless responses and attrition in survey data with personality. 28th Annual Meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Houston, TX.
85.
BuchananEAHvizdakEE. Online survey tools: ethical and methodological concerns of human research ethics committees. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics2009; 4: 37–48.
86.
SnäckerströmTJohansenC. De-identified linkage of data across separate registers: a proposal for improved protection of personal information in registry-based clinical research. Ups J Med Sci2019; 124: 29–32.
87.
McGrawD. Building public trust in uses of health insurance portability and accountability Act de-identified data. J Am Med Inform Assoc2013; 20: 29–34.
