Suppr超能文献

计算机化问卷与调查数据质量

Computerized questionnaires and the quality of survey data.

作者信息

Hanscom Brett, Lurie Jon D, Homa Karen, Weinstein James N

机构信息

Dartmouth Medical School, Hanover, New Hampshire, USA.

出版信息

Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2002 Aug 15;27(16):1797-801. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200208150-00020.

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective data quality analysis was conducted.

OBJECTIVE

To compare missing response rates and internal consistency between computerized and paper surveys administered to spine patients.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Computerized patient surveys have been shown to offer numerous advantages over traditional paper surveys. It has been assumed that computerized surveys also improve data quality, but quantitative comparisons have not been made.

METHODS

Between January 1998 and December 2000, approximately 3500 computerized questionnaires and 15,000 paper questionnaires containing the MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) and the Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire were administered in the National Spine Network. Missing response rates and the Response Consistency Index (RCI) were compared between computerized and paper questionnaire data.

RESULTS

Computer surveys had approximately half the missing response rate of paper surveys. For the SF-36, the computer survey had 1.7% missing, as compared with 3.3% missing on paper (P < 0.001). For the Oswestry, the computer survey had 2.9% missing, as compared with 6% missing on paper (P < 0.001). Whereas 84% of the SF-36 surveys and 85% of the Oswestry surveys collected by computer were completely filled out (no missing responses), only 68% of the SF-36 surveys (P < 0.001) and 77% of the Oswestry surveys (P < 0.001) collected on paper were completely filled out. The SF-36 data collected by computer had better internal consistency than the paper-form data, with average Response Consistency Index scores of 0.12 and 0.16, respectively (P = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Superior response rates and higher internal consistency suggest that computerized survey systems improve data quality, and may enhance instrument validity for commonly used measures of spine patient health.

摘要

研究设计

进行了一项回顾性数据质量分析。

目的

比较对脊柱患者进行的计算机化调查和纸质调查的缺失回答率及内部一致性。

背景数据总结

计算机化患者调查已显示出比传统纸质调查具有诸多优势。人们一直认为计算机化调查也能提高数据质量,但尚未进行定量比较。

方法

在1998年1月至2000年12月期间,在国家脊柱网络中发放了约3500份包含MOS 36项简短健康调查(SF - 36)和奥斯维斯特腰背痛残疾问卷的计算机化问卷以及15000份纸质问卷。比较了计算机化问卷数据和纸质问卷数据的缺失回答率及回答一致性指数(RCI)。

结果

计算机调查的缺失回答率约为纸质调查的一半。对于SF - 36,计算机调查的缺失率为1.7%,而纸质调查为3.3%(P < 0.001)。对于奥斯维斯特问卷,计算机调查的缺失率为2.9%,纸质调查为6%(P < 0.001)。计算机收集的SF - 36调查中有84%、奥斯维斯特调查中有85%完全填写(无缺失回答),而纸质收集的SF - 36调查中只有68%(P < 0.001)、奥斯维斯特调查中只有77%(P < 0.001)完全填写。计算机收集的SF - 36数据的内部一致性优于纸质数据,回答一致性指数平均得分分别为0.12和0.16(P = 0.001)。

结论

更高的回答率和更高的内部一致性表明,计算机化调查系统可提高数据质量,并可能增强用于评估脊柱患者健康的常用指标的效度。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验