Propensity score matching to measure the effect of survey mode on reports of racial and ethnic discrimination in health care

Jessie B Kemmick Pintor, Donna McAlpine, Timothy J. Beebe, Pamela J. Johnson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To examine the effect of survey mode (mail vs. telephone) on the likelihood of reporting health care-related discrimination based on race, ethnicity, or nationality. Methods: We use data from a mixed-mode, mail and telephone survey of public health care program enrollees (N=2807), including Somali, Hmong, African American, American Indian, and Latino populations. Self-reported discrimination was measured as the experience of unfair treatment by health care providers due to race, ethnicity, or nationality. We use propensity score matching to create exchangeable groups of phone and mail respondents based on the probability of completing the survey by phone. Results: Overall, 33.1% of respondents reported having experienced discrimination in health care, but only 23.6% of telephone respondents reported discrimination compared with 36.8% of mail respondents. After matching phone and mail respondents based on probability of responding by telephone, all observable significant differences between respondents that were brought about by differential self-selection into mode were erased, allowing us to estimate the effect of survey mode on report of discrimination. Even after matching, the mode effect remains, where report of health care discrimination for telephone respondents would have been 12.6 percentage points higher had they responded by mail (22.6% vs. 35.2%). Conclusions: Survey mode has a significant effect on report of discrimination. Respondents may be more willing to disclose experiences of discrimination in a mail survey than to a telephone interviewer. Findings have substantial policy and clinical significance as variation in report of discrimination based on mode may lead to underestimation of the extent of the problem.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)471-476
Number of pages6
JournalMedical Care
Volume53
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 27 2015

Fingerprint

Racism
Propensity Score
Delivery of Health Care
Postal Service
Telephone
Surveys and Questionnaires
Ethnic Groups
Asian Americans
North American Indians
Hispanic Americans
African Americans
Health Personnel

Keywords

  • health care discrimination
  • mode effect
  • propensity scores

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

Propensity score matching to measure the effect of survey mode on reports of racial and ethnic discrimination in health care. / Pintor, Jessie B Kemmick; McAlpine, Donna; Beebe, Timothy J.; Johnson, Pamela J.

In: Medical Care, Vol. 53, No. 5, 27.04.2015, p. 471-476.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Pintor, Jessie B Kemmick ; McAlpine, Donna ; Beebe, Timothy J. ; Johnson, Pamela J. / Propensity score matching to measure the effect of survey mode on reports of racial and ethnic discrimination in health care. In: Medical Care. 2015 ; Vol. 53, No. 5. pp. 471-476.
@article{266837801bfd48d2ba1afb8d8992d0d4,
title = "Propensity score matching to measure the effect of survey mode on reports of racial and ethnic discrimination in health care",
abstract = "Objective: To examine the effect of survey mode (mail vs. telephone) on the likelihood of reporting health care-related discrimination based on race, ethnicity, or nationality. Methods: We use data from a mixed-mode, mail and telephone survey of public health care program enrollees (N=2807), including Somali, Hmong, African American, American Indian, and Latino populations. Self-reported discrimination was measured as the experience of unfair treatment by health care providers due to race, ethnicity, or nationality. We use propensity score matching to create exchangeable groups of phone and mail respondents based on the probability of completing the survey by phone. Results: Overall, 33.1{\%} of respondents reported having experienced discrimination in health care, but only 23.6{\%} of telephone respondents reported discrimination compared with 36.8{\%} of mail respondents. After matching phone and mail respondents based on probability of responding by telephone, all observable significant differences between respondents that were brought about by differential self-selection into mode were erased, allowing us to estimate the effect of survey mode on report of discrimination. Even after matching, the mode effect remains, where report of health care discrimination for telephone respondents would have been 12.6 percentage points higher had they responded by mail (22.6{\%} vs. 35.2{\%}). Conclusions: Survey mode has a significant effect on report of discrimination. Respondents may be more willing to disclose experiences of discrimination in a mail survey than to a telephone interviewer. Findings have substantial policy and clinical significance as variation in report of discrimination based on mode may lead to underestimation of the extent of the problem.",
keywords = "health care discrimination, mode effect, propensity scores",
author = "Pintor, {Jessie B Kemmick} and Donna McAlpine and Beebe, {Timothy J.} and Johnson, {Pamela J.}",
year = "2015",
month = "4",
day = "27",
doi = "10.1097/MLR.0000000000000351",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "53",
pages = "471--476",
journal = "Medical Care",
issn = "0025-7079",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Propensity score matching to measure the effect of survey mode on reports of racial and ethnic discrimination in health care

AU - Pintor, Jessie B Kemmick

AU - McAlpine, Donna

AU - Beebe, Timothy J.

AU - Johnson, Pamela J.

PY - 2015/4/27

Y1 - 2015/4/27

N2 - Objective: To examine the effect of survey mode (mail vs. telephone) on the likelihood of reporting health care-related discrimination based on race, ethnicity, or nationality. Methods: We use data from a mixed-mode, mail and telephone survey of public health care program enrollees (N=2807), including Somali, Hmong, African American, American Indian, and Latino populations. Self-reported discrimination was measured as the experience of unfair treatment by health care providers due to race, ethnicity, or nationality. We use propensity score matching to create exchangeable groups of phone and mail respondents based on the probability of completing the survey by phone. Results: Overall, 33.1% of respondents reported having experienced discrimination in health care, but only 23.6% of telephone respondents reported discrimination compared with 36.8% of mail respondents. After matching phone and mail respondents based on probability of responding by telephone, all observable significant differences between respondents that were brought about by differential self-selection into mode were erased, allowing us to estimate the effect of survey mode on report of discrimination. Even after matching, the mode effect remains, where report of health care discrimination for telephone respondents would have been 12.6 percentage points higher had they responded by mail (22.6% vs. 35.2%). Conclusions: Survey mode has a significant effect on report of discrimination. Respondents may be more willing to disclose experiences of discrimination in a mail survey than to a telephone interviewer. Findings have substantial policy and clinical significance as variation in report of discrimination based on mode may lead to underestimation of the extent of the problem.

AB - Objective: To examine the effect of survey mode (mail vs. telephone) on the likelihood of reporting health care-related discrimination based on race, ethnicity, or nationality. Methods: We use data from a mixed-mode, mail and telephone survey of public health care program enrollees (N=2807), including Somali, Hmong, African American, American Indian, and Latino populations. Self-reported discrimination was measured as the experience of unfair treatment by health care providers due to race, ethnicity, or nationality. We use propensity score matching to create exchangeable groups of phone and mail respondents based on the probability of completing the survey by phone. Results: Overall, 33.1% of respondents reported having experienced discrimination in health care, but only 23.6% of telephone respondents reported discrimination compared with 36.8% of mail respondents. After matching phone and mail respondents based on probability of responding by telephone, all observable significant differences between respondents that were brought about by differential self-selection into mode were erased, allowing us to estimate the effect of survey mode on report of discrimination. Even after matching, the mode effect remains, where report of health care discrimination for telephone respondents would have been 12.6 percentage points higher had they responded by mail (22.6% vs. 35.2%). Conclusions: Survey mode has a significant effect on report of discrimination. Respondents may be more willing to disclose experiences of discrimination in a mail survey than to a telephone interviewer. Findings have substantial policy and clinical significance as variation in report of discrimination based on mode may lead to underestimation of the extent of the problem.

KW - health care discrimination

KW - mode effect

KW - propensity scores

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84928494160&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84928494160&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000351

DO - 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000351

M3 - Article

C2 - 25811630

AN - SCOPUS:84928494160

VL - 53

SP - 471

EP - 476

JO - Medical Care

JF - Medical Care

SN - 0025-7079

IS - 5

ER -