Lousy methodology, but they're being accurate and truthful.

mikey_the_rat

Virtually all survey results are worded that way.

There's also still some statistical validity to basing the results of a poll on respondents instead of the entire polled group.

and then pretending it represents the entire country.

Or going into an ice cream store, and saying "100% of the country loves ice cream [because I asked the people in the ice cream store and they represent everyone not just the self-selected ice cream lovers]."

If they had said, "580 of the 699 doctors we, as a conservative organization asking fellow conservatives, were able to get answers from, said they hated Obamacare" that would have been one thing. Instead they pretended those 580 doctors were representative of ALL the doctors.

Valid polling takes more than a fax machine with an auto dialer to mean anything.

They polled doctors by fax.

If they only polled like-minded doctors, your argument would be valid. If they didn't specifically slant their pool, the results still have statistical merit.

The core principle of statistical polling is random sampling of the entire population. This was a self-selected, non-random group who chose to respond, apparently mostly "conservative" ones who saw it as an opportunity to express their dislike for Obama. It's as statistically invalid as a poll on foxnews.com.

I know that you mean it is numerically correct - 83% of the respondents returned.

But it isn't close to being a representative sample, and statistics - really both inferential and descriptive (such as this) assume a representative sample. So statistically speaking, it isn't "valid" (valid meaning measuring what you say you are measuring - they are not. They are measuring the response of those who cared enough to fax the thing back, it is a biased sample).

A 4.3% response rate is so woefully inadequate I don't really have a good way of describing it.

or saw through the BS immediately and pitched the survey in the trash can.

1. Did the devil muslin Obamacare ruin your life?

Question two

2. USA USA USA



Yeah i don't know how this survey could be skewed.......right.

caused by human activities.

that says 2-3% of climate scientists don't believe there is enough evidence that humans are causing global warming. That survey was sent to more than 10,000 scientists and only 77 climate scientists responded. 75 of 77 blamed humans, which is where the 97-98% number comes from. If you have a problem with this health care survey you should definitely have a problem with that climate survey.

... I worked in healthcare for over 30 years and I don't know even one doctor who would consider resigning over a law that makes their jobs easier.

It is statistically valid. For what its worth, I asked friends of ours (husband and wife who have their own OB/GYN clinic) and they said they have thought about it.

However, it is not a shock as I think most normal people would evaluate their career options when faced with decent sized changes (hell, I have done it over much less). We all know there will not be a large chunk of professionals getting out of the field.

580 sample size is very adequate. Exit polls have called elections using less. Almost always correctly.

http://americanresearchgroup.com/moe.html

Does that mean 83% of doctors really would quit? No not really necessarily. The survey design could be biased, the inherent self-selected nature of the sample may skew it (obviously every survey depends on a willingness to respond, but here we also may have a willingness to respond to a specific source), or the sampling could be skewed (I have no idea how many doctors still rely on faxes for example and no idea if more do so in specific demographic segments).

But the sample size, that's fine.

By the way the response rate for a non-human, automated delivery mechanism is very high. Lucky to get 2% or so there.

As in "They were asked about it, and thus, were forced to CONSIDER their options." It's just that 83% considered the fax the got and decided against answering some dumbass survey.

As for the 580 who say they'll quit over it, I say, "Good riddance!" If they became doctors mainly for the money, then their quitting is not only no big loss, they all their potential patients a huge favor by getting out.

...if 83% of DPMA doctors quit, would we all get healthier?

Any doctor or medical office staff person who didn't throw this straight into the trash, maybe with a small muttered, "fuck you for wasting my time and paper," isn't likely to be someone I'd want as a medical provider.

I'm trying to picture the sorts who did return this survey, and the picture isn't pretty. Most surveys were probably returned by "conservative" office staff who didn't even bother consulting the boss.