Lane Shannon J, Heddle Nancy M, Arnold Emmy, Walker Irwin
Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2006 May 31;6:23. doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-6-23.
Handheld computers are increasingly favoured over paper and pencil methods to capture data in clinical research.
This study systematically identified and reviewed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the two methods for self-recording and reporting data, and where at least one of the following outcomes was assessed: data accuracy; timeliness of data capture; and adherence to protocols for data collection.
A comprehensive key word search of NLM Gateway's database yielded 9 studies fitting the criteria for inclusion. Data extraction was performed and checked by two of the authors. None of the studies included all outcomes. The results overall, favor handheld computers over paper and pencil for data collection among study participants but the data are not uniform for the different outcomes. Handheld computers appear superior in timeliness of receipt and data handling (four of four studies) and are preferred by most subjects (three of four studies). On the other hand, only one of the trials adequately compared adherence to instructions for recording and submission of data (handheld computers were superior), and comparisons of accuracy were inconsistent between five studies.
Handhelds are an effective alternative to paper and pencil modes of data collection; they are faster and were preferred by most users.
在临床研究中，与纸笔方法相比，手持计算机越来越受到青睐，用于数据采集。
本研究系统地识别并回顾了比较这两种自我记录和报告数据方法的随机对照试验（RCT），并且评估了以下至少一项结果：数据准确性；数据采集的及时性；以及对数据收集协议的遵守情况。
对美国国立医学图书馆网关数据库进行全面的关键词搜索后，得到9项符合纳入标准的研究。由两位作者进行数据提取并检查。没有一项研究涵盖所有结果。总体而言，研究结果表明，在研究参与者的数据收集中，手持计算机比纸笔更具优势，但不同结果的数据并不一致。手持计算机在接收和数据处理的及时性方面表现出色（四项研究中的四项），并且大多数受试者更喜欢使用手持计算机（四项研究中的三项）。另一方面，只有一项试验充分比较了对记录和提交数据说明的遵守情况（手持计算机更具优势），并且五项研究中数据准确性的比较结果并不一致。
手持计算机是纸笔数据收集方式的有效替代方案；它们速度更快，并且受到大多数用户的青睐。
