Dataset Information

Paper- or Web-Based Questionnaire Invitations as a Method for Data Collection: Cross-Sectional Comparative Study of Differences in Response Rate, Completeness of Data, and Financial Cost.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Paper questionnaires have traditionally been the first choice for data collection in research. However, declining response rates over the past decade have increased the risk of selection bias in cross-sectional studies. The growing use of the Internet offers new ways of collecting data, but trials using Web-based questionnaires have so far seen mixed results. A secure, online digital mailbox (e-Boks) linked to a civil registration number became mandatory for all Danish citizens in 2014 (exemption granted only in extraordinary cases). Approximately 89% of the Danish population have a digital mailbox, which is used for correspondence with public authorities. OBJECTIVE:We aimed to compare response rates, completeness of data, and financial costs for different invitation methods: traditional surface mail and digital mail. METHODS:We designed a cross-sectional comparative study. An invitation to participate in a survey on help-seeking behavior in out-of-hours care was sent to two groups of randomly selected citizens from age groups 30-39 and 50-59 years and parents to those aged 0-4 years using either traditional surface mail (paper group) or digital mail sent to a secure online mailbox (digital group). Costs per respondent were measured by adding up all costs for handling, dispatch, printing, and work salary and then dividing the total figure by the number of respondents. Data completeness was assessed by comparing the number of missing values between the two methods. Socioeconomic variables (age, gender, family income, education duration, immigrant status, and job status) were compared both between respondents and nonrespondents and within these groups to evaluate the degree of selection bias. RESULTS:A total 3600 citizens were invited in each group; 1303 (36.29%) responded to the digital invitation and 1653 (45.99%) to the paper invitation (difference 9.66%, 95% CI 7.40-11.92). The costs were €1.51 per respondent for the digital group and €15.67 for paper group respondents. Paper questionnaires generally had more missing values; this was significant in five of 17 variables (P<.05). Substantial differences were found in the socioeconomic variables between respondents and nonrespondents, whereas only minor differences were seen within the groups of respondents and nonrespondents. CONCLUSIONS:Although we found lower response rates for Web-based invitations, this solution was more cost-effective (by a factor of 10) and had slightly lower numbers of missing values than questionnaires sent with paper invitations. Analyses of socioeconomic variables showed almost no difference between nonrespondents in both groups, which could imply that the lower response rate in the digital group does not necessarily increase the level of selection bias. Invitations to questionnaire studies via digital mail may be an excellent option for collecting research data in the future. This study may serve as the foundational pillar of digital data collection in health care research in Scandinavia and other countries considering implementing similar systems.

SUBMITTER: Ebert JF

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5801515 | biostudies-other | 2018 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

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.

Project description:BackgroundA web-based survey is a novel method for data capture. Some studies have applied web-based surveys in pediatrics, but few of them have reported data on the differences between web-based and traditional questionnaire surveys.ObjectiveThe objective of our study was to evaluate the internal consistency of a web-based survey and compare it with a traditional questionnaire survey in pediatrics.MethodsA convenience sample of caregivers was invited to participate in the survey on feeding patterns and their children's eating behaviors if their children were aged 2 to 7 years. A web-based survey and a traditional questionnaire survey were carried out between October 2018 and July 2019. A total of 1085 caregivers were involved in this study, and they were divided into the following three groups based on methods and sources: (1) web-based survey from a web source, (2) web-based survey from a hospital source, and (3) traditional questionnaire survey from a hospital source. The data were then compared and analyzed.ResultsA total of 735 caregivers participated in the web-based survey and 350 caregivers participated in the traditional questionnaire survey, and 816 cases were then included in the analyses after data processing. The effective rate of the web-based survey was 70.1% (515/735), and the completeness rate of the traditional questionnaire survey was 86.0% (301/350). There were no significant differences between web-based surveys from different sources. However, demographic characteristics were significantly different between the web-based and traditional questionnaire surveys, mainly in terms of age and caregivers (χ²4=16.509, P=.002 and χ²4=111.464, P<.001, respectively). Caregivers of children aged 2 to 3 years and grandparents were more likely to respond to the web-based survey. Age-specific stratified analysis showed that the score of "monitoring" and the reporting rate of "poor appetite" in children aged 2 to 3 years were significantly higher in the web-based survey compared to the traditional questionnaire survey after adjusting for demographic characteristics.ConclusionsA web-based survey could be a feasible tool in pediatric studies. However, differences in demographic characteristics and their possible impacts on the results should be considered in the analyses.

Project description:BackgroundEarly cardiopulmonary resuscitation and prompt defibrillation markedly increase the survival rate in the event of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). As future health care professionals, medical students should be trained to efficiently manage an unexpectedly encountered OHCA.ObjectiveOur aim was to assess basic life support (BLS) knowledge in junior medical students at the University of Geneva Faculty of Medicine (UGFM) and to compare it with that of the general population.MethodsJunior UGFM students and lay people who had registered for BLS classes given by a Red Cross-affiliated center were sent invitation links to complete a web-based questionnaire. The primary outcome was the between-group difference in a 10-question score regarding cardiopulmonary resuscitation knowledge. Secondary outcomes were the differences in the rate of correct answers for each individual question, the level of self-assessed confidence in the ability to perform resuscitation, and a 6-question score, "essential BLS knowledge," which only contains key elements of the chain of survival. Continuous variables were first analyzed using the Student t test, then by multivariable linear regression. Fisher exact test was used for between-groups comparison of binary variables.ResultsThe mean score was higher in medical students than in lay people for both the 10-question score (mean 5.8, SD 1.7 vs mean 4.2, SD 1.7; P<.001) and 6-question score (mean 3.0, SD 1.1 vs mean 2.0, SD 1.0; P<.001). Participants who were younger or already trained scored consistently better. Although the phone number of the emergency medical dispatch center was well known in both groups (medical students, 75/80, 94% vs lay people, 51/62, 82%; P=.06), most participants were unable to identify the criteria used to recognize OHCA, and almost none were able to correctly reorganize the BLS sequence. Medical students felt more confident than lay people in their ability to perform resuscitation (mean 4.7, SD 2.2 vs mean 3.1, SD 2.1; P<.001). Female gender and older age were associated with lower confidence, while participants who had already attended a BLS course prior to taking the questionnaire felt more confident.ConclusionsAlthough junior medical students were more knowledgeable than lay people regarding BLS procedures, the proportion of correct answers was low in both groups, and changes in BLS education policy should be considered.

Dataset Information

Paper- or Web-Based Questionnaire Invitations as a Method for Data Collection: Cross-Sectional Comparative Study of Differences in Response Rate, Completeness of Data, and Financial Cost.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets