We thank the author of the letter for a critical reading of our article1. Our study was conducted to generate evidence to inform and, if needed, review policy responses particularly with regard to the use of chemoprophylaxis by healthcare workers against COVID-19. While acknowledging the shortcoming in recruiting cases and controls based on the calculated sample size, we would like to underline that the response rate in our study has been higher compared to the other studies, following a similar methodology, both in India and abroad2,3,4,5. Registry-based recruitment and telephonic surveys are known to face the hurdle of non-participation. Therefore, in order to improve the response rate, we followed several strategies, such as multiple call attempts, targeted call times and training interviewers6,7,8.
While we are aware that the article by Mehra et al9, used as a reference in our publication, has been retracted, we would like to highlight the fact that our article was published in May 2020, before the retraction notice was issued on June 5, 2020. The Lancet editors published an expression of concern about the article by Mehra et al9 on June 3, 202010. Further, the topic of the now retracted study was treatment of COVID-19 cases, whereas the ambit of our study was pre-exposure prophylaxis against SARS-CoV-2. The two were very different contexts.
References
- 1.Chatterjee P, Anand T, Singh KJ, Rasaily R, Singh R, Das S, et al. Healthcare workers & SARS-CoV-2 infection in India: A case-control investigation in the time of COVID-19. Indian J Med Res. 2020;151:459–67. doi: 10.4103/ijmr.IJMR_2234_20. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Zhang R, Thacker N, Choudhury P, Pazol K, Orenstein WA, Omer SB, et al. Comparison of two survey methods based on response distribution of pediatricians regarding immunization for children in India: Mail versus Telephone. Int J TDH. 2016;16:1–10. [Google Scholar]
- 3.Gahr M, Eller J, Connemann BJ, Schönfeldt-Lecuona C. Subjective reasons for non-reporting of adverse drug reactions in a sample of physicians in outpatient care. Pharmacopsychiatry. 2016;49:57–61. doi: 10.1055/s-0035-1569291. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Peretti-Watel P, Bendiane MK, Pegliasco H, Lapiana JM, Favre R, Galinier A, et al. Doctors’ opinions on euthanasia, end of life care, and doctor-patient communication: Telephone survey in France. BMJ. 2003;327:595–6. doi: 10.1136/bmj.327.7415.595. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.DuVal G, Clarridge B, Gensler G, Danis M. A national survey of US internists’ experiences with ethical dilemmas and ethics consultation. J Gen Intern Med. 2004;19:251–8. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.21238.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.de Leeuw ED, Hox JJ. I am not selling anything: 29 experiments in telephone introductions. Int J Public Opinion Res. 2004;16:464–73. [Google Scholar]
- 7.Sangster RL. 2003 Joint Statistical Meetings - Section on survey research methods. Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association; 2003. Can we improve our methods to reduce nonresponse bias in RDD surveys? p. 8. [Google Scholar]
- 8.O'Toole J, Sinclair M, Leder K. Maximising response rates in household telephone surveys. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008;8:71. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-8-71. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Mehra MR, Ruschitzka F, Patel AN. Retraction - Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: A multinational registry analysis. Lancet. 2020;395:1820. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31324-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Editors TL. Expression of concern: Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: A multinational registry analysis. Lancet. 2020;395:e102. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31290-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]