Dataset Information

Analysis of erroneous data entries in paper based and electronic data collection.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Electronic data collection (EDC) has become a suitable alternative to paper based data collection (PBDC) in biomedical research even in resource poor settings. During a survey in Nepal, data were collected using both systems and data entry errors compared between both methods. Collected data were checked for completeness, values outside of realistic ranges, internal logic and date variables for reasonable time frames. Variables were grouped into 5 categories and the number of discordant entries were compared between both systems, overall and per variable category.

Results

Data from 52 variables collected from 358 participants were available. Discrepancies between both data sets were found in 12.6% of all entries (2352/18,616). Differences between data points were identified in 18.0% (643/3580) of continuous variables, 15.8% of time variables (113/716), 13.0% of date variables (140/1074), 12.0% of text variables (86/716), and 10.9% of categorical variables (1370/12,530). Overall 64% (1499/2352) of all discrepancies were due to data omissions, 76.6% (1148/1499) of missing entries were among categorical data. Omissions in PBDC (n?=?1002) were twice as frequent as in EDC (n?=?497, p?

SUBMITTER: Ley B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6704619 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Analysis of erroneous data entries in paper based and electronic data collection.

Ley Benedikt B Rijal Komal Raj KR Marfurt Jutta J Adhikari Naba Raj NR Banjara Megha Raj MR Shrestha Upendra Thapa UT Thriemer Kamala K Price Ric N RN Ghimire Prakash P

BMC research notes 20190822 1

<h4>Objective</h4>Electronic data collection (EDC) has become a suitable alternative to paper based data collection (PBDC) in biomedical research even in resource poor settings. During a survey in Nepal, data were collected using both systems and data entry errors compared between both methods. Collected data were checked for completeness, values outside of realistic ranges, internal logic and date variables for reasonable time frames. Variables were grouped into 5 categories and the number of d ...[more]

PMID: 31439025

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundElectronic data collection is increasingly used for household surveys, but factors influencing design and implementation have not been widely studied. The Every Newborn-INDEPTH (EN-INDEPTH) study was a multi-site survey using electronic data collection in five INDEPTH health and demographic surveillance system sites.MethodsWe described experiences and learning involved in the design and implementation of the EN-INDEPTH survey, and undertook six focus group discussions with field and research team to explore their experiences. Thematic analyses were conducted in NVivo12 using an iterative process guided by a priori themes.ResultsFive steps of the process of selecting, adapting and implementing electronic data collection in the EN-INDEPTH study are described. Firstly, we reviewed possible electronic data collection platforms, and selected the World Bank's Survey Solutions® as the most suited for the EN-INDEPTH study. Secondly, the survey questionnaire was coded and translated into local languages, and further context-specific adaptations were made. Thirdly, data collectors were selected and trained using standardised manual. Training varied between 4.5 and 10 days. Fourthly, instruments were piloted in the field and the questionnaires finalised. During data collection, data collectors appreciated the built-in skip patterns and error messages. Internet connection unreliability was a challenge, especially for data synchronisation. For the fifth and final step, data management and analyses, it was considered that data quality was higher and less time was spent on data cleaning. The possibility to use paradata to analyse survey timing and corrections was valued. Synchronisation and data transfer should be given special consideration.ConclusionWe synthesised experiences using electronic data collection in a multi-site household survey, including perceived advantages and challenges. Our recommendations for others considering electronic data collection include ensuring adaptations of tools to local context, piloting/refining the questionnaire in one site first, buying power banks to mitigate against power interruption and paying attention to issues such as GPS tracking and synchronisation, particularly in settings with poor internet connectivity.

Project description:PurposeMissing data are a significant problem in clinical trials, particularly for quality of life (QOL), which cannot be obtained retrospectively. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of an electronic web-based strategy for QOL data collection in a cooperative group radiation oncology trial setting.Methods and materialsRadiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0828 was a prospective National Cancer Institute cooperative group companion study of RTOG-0415, a randomized study of conventional versus hypofractionated radiation. Forty-nine English-speaking patients with favorable risk prostate cancer who enrolled on RTOG-0415 consented to using web-based technology for completing QOL. In RTOG-0415, using paper forms, the 6-month QOL compliance rate was 52%. The purpose of RTOG-0828 was to test the feasibility of a web-based strategy with the goal of increasing the 6-month QOL completion rate by 25% (from 52% to 77%) for a relative improvement of ~50%. The web-based tool used in this study was VisionTree Optimal Care (VTOC; VisionTree Software, Inc, San Diego, CA), a Health-Insurance-Portability-Accountability-Act secure, online technology that allows real-time tracking and e-mail reminders. The primary endpoint was the 6-month compliance rate for the validated QOL instrument, Expanded Prostate Index Composite.ResultsThe QOL completion rate at baseline was 98%. Compared with the prior 52% QOL completion rate at 6 months using paper forms, the QOL web-based completion rate at 6 months was 90% (2-sided P value < .001). At 12 months, the EPIC completion rate was 82% (compared with 36% using paper forms).ConclusionsThis RTOG study suggests that a web-based strategy to collect QOL appears to be feasible in the cooperative group radiation oncology trial setting and is associated with an increase in the 6-month QOL compliance rate compared with the prior method of using paper forms. The RTOG plans to further test this strategy in a head-and-neck cancer trial across all participating RTOG sites.

Project description:BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to demonstrate the validity and efficiency of the Outcomes Management and Evaluation (OME) system, a prospectively designed electronic data collection tool, for collecting comprehensive and standardized surgical data in shoulder arthroplasty.MethodsSurgical data from the first 100 cases of shoulder arthroplasty that were collected into the OME database were analyzed. Surgeons completed a traditional narrative operative note and also an OME case report using an encrypted smartphone. A blinded reviewer extracted data from the operative notes and implant logs in the electronic medical records (EMR) by manual chart review. OME and EMR data were compared with regard to data counts and agreement between 39 variables related to preoperative pathology, including rotator cuff status and glenoid wear, and surgical procedures. Data counts were assessed using both raw percentages and with McNemar's test (with continuity correction). Agreement of nominal variables was analyzed using Cohen's unweighted kappa (κ) and of ordinal variables using the linearly weighted Cohen's test. Efficiency was assessed by calculating the median time needed to complete OME.ResultsCompared to the EMR, the OME database had significantly higher data counts for 56% (22 of 39) of the variables assessed. A high level of proportional and statistical agreement was demonstrated between the data in the two datasets. 10 of 39 variables had 100% agreement but could not be statistically compared because both datasets had the same single response under those variables. Among the 29 variables that were compared, 79% (23 of 29) of variables had >80% raw proportional agreement, and 69% (20 of 29) of variables showed at least substantial agreement (κ > 0.6). The median time for completing OME surgery data entry was 92 seconds (IQR 70 - 126).ConclusionThe prospectively designed, electronic data entry system (OME) is an efficient and valid tool for collecting comprehensive and standardized surgical data on shoulder arthroplasty.Level of evidenceLevel IV.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Roadside observational studies play a fundamental role in designing evidence-informed strategies to address the pressing global health problem of road traffic injuries. Paper-based data collection has been the standard method for such studies, although digital methods are gaining popularity in all types of primary data collection. OBJECTIVE:This study aims to understand the reliability, productivity, and efficiency of paper vs digital data collection based on three different road user behaviors: helmet use, seatbelt use, and speeding. It also aims to understand the cost and time efficiency of each method and to evaluate potential trade-offs among reliability, productivity, and efficiency. METHODS:A total of 150 observational sessions were conducted simultaneously for each risk factor in Mumbai, India, across two rounds of data collection. We matched the simultaneous digital and paper observation periods by date, time, and location, and compared the reliability by subgroups and the productivity using Pearson correlations (r). We also conducted logistic regressions separately by method to understand how similar results of inferential analyses would be. The time to complete an observation and the time to obtain a complete dataset were also compared, as were the total costs in US dollars for fieldwork, data entry, management, and cleaning. RESULTS:Productivity was higher in paper than digital methods in each round for each risk factor. However, the sample sizes across both methods provided a precision of 0.7 percentage points or smaller. The gap between digital and paper data collection productivity narrowed across rounds, with correlations improving from r=0.27-0.49 to 0.89-0.96. Reliability in risk factor proportions was between 0.61 and 0.99, improving between the two rounds for each risk factor. The results of the logistic regressions were also largely comparable between the two methods. Differences in regression results were largely attributable to small sample sizes in some variable levels or random error in variables where the prevalence of the outcome was similar among variable levels. Although data collectors were able to complete an observation using paper more quickly, the digital dataset was available approximately 9 days sooner. Although fixed costs were higher for digital data collection, variable costs were much lower, resulting in a 7.73% (US $3011/38,947) lower overall cost. CONCLUSIONS:Our study did not face trade-offs among time efficiency, cost efficiency, statistical reliability, and descriptive comparability when deciding between digital and paper, as digital data collection proved equivalent or superior on these domains in the context of our project. As trade-offs among cost, timeliness, and comparability-and the relative importance of each-could be unique to every data collection project, researchers should carefully consider the questionnaire complexity, target sample size, implementation plan, cost and logistical constraints, and geographical contexts when making the decision between digital and paper.

Dataset Information

Analysis of erroneous data entries in paper based and electronic data collection.

Objective

Results

Publications

Analysis of erroneous data entries in paper based and electronic data collection.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets