Surveys are one of the most frequently employed study designs in healthcare epidemiology research. Generally easier to undertake and less costly than many other study designs, surveys can be invaluable to gain insights into opinions and practices in large samples and may be descriptive and/or be used to test associations. In this context, qualitative research methods may complement this study design either at the survey development phase and/or at the interpretation/extension of results stage. This methods article focuses on key considerations for designing and deploying surveys in healthcare epidemiology and antibiotic stewardship, including identification of whether or not de novo survey development is necessary, ways to optimally lay out and display a survey, denominator measurement, discussion of biases to keep in mind particularly in research using surveys, and the role of qualitative research methods to complement surveys. We review examples of surveys in healthcare epidemiology and antimicrobial stewardship and review the pros and cons of methods used. A checklist is provided to help aid design and deployment of surveys in healthcare epidemiology and antimicrobial stewardship. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2016;1-6.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 203. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 February 2025.
All research outputs
#245,860
of 34,763,505 outputs
Outputs from Infection control and hospital epidemiology (Online)
#56
of 6,296 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,699
of 335,902 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Infection control and hospital epidemiology (Online)
#1
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,763,505 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,296 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 335,902 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
