Giduthuri Joseph G, Maire Nicolas, Joseph Saju, Kudale Abhay, Schaetti Christian, Sundaram Neisha, Schindler Christian, Weiss Mitchell G
Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland; University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
The Maharashtra Association of Anthropological Sciences, Centre for Health Research and Development, Pune, India.
PLoS One. 2014 Sep 18;9(9):e107374. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0107374. eCollection 2014.
Mobile electronic devices are replacing paper-based instruments and questionnaires for epidemiological and public health research. The elimination of a data-entry step after an interview is a notable advantage over paper, saving investigator time, decreasing the time lags in managing and analyzing data, and potentially improving the data quality by removing the error-prone data-entry step. Research has not yet provided adequate evidence, however, to substantiate the claim of fewer errors for computerized interviews.
We developed an Android-based illness explanatory interview for influenza vaccine acceptance and tested the instrument in a field study in Pune, India, for feasibility and acceptability. Error rates for tablet and paper were compared with reference to the voice recording of the interview as gold standard to assess discrepancies. We also examined the preference of interviewers for the classical paper-based or the electronic version of the interview and compared the costs of research with both data collection devices.
In 95 interviews with household respondents, total error rates with paper and tablet devices were nearly the same (2.01% and 1.99% respectively). Most interviewers indicated no preference for a particular device; but those with a preference opted for tablets. The initial investment in tablet-based interviews was higher compared to paper, while the recurring costs per interview were lower with the use of tablets.
An Android-based tablet version of a complex interview was developed and successfully validated. Advantages were not compromised by increased errors, and field research assistants with a preference preferred the Android device. Use of tablets may be more costly than paper for small samples and less costly for large studies.
在流行病学和公共卫生研究中,移动电子设备正在取代纸质工具和问卷。相较于纸质工具,访谈后无需数据录入步骤是一个显著优势,可节省调查人员时间,减少数据管理和分析中的时间滞后,并通过去除易出错的数据录入步骤潜在地提高数据质量。然而,研究尚未提供充分证据来证实计算机化访谈错误更少的说法。
我们开发了一款基于安卓系统的关于流感疫苗接受度的疾病解释性访谈工具,并在印度浦那的一项实地研究中测试了该工具的可行性和可接受性。以访谈的语音记录作为金标准,比较平板电脑和纸质工具的错误率以评估差异。我们还考察了访谈者对传统纸质访谈或电子访谈版本的偏好,并比较了两种数据收集设备的研究成本。
在对家庭受访者进行的95次访谈中,纸质工具和平板电脑设备的总错误率几乎相同(分别为2.01%和1.99%)。大多数访谈者表示对特定设备没有偏好;但那些有偏好的人选择了平板电脑。基于平板电脑的访谈初始投资比纸质工具高,而每次访谈的经常性成本使用平板电脑时更低。
开发了一个基于安卓系统的复杂访谈平板电脑版本并成功验证。优势并未因错误增加而受损,有偏好的实地研究助手更喜欢安卓设备。对于小样本,使用平板电脑可能比纸质工具成本更高,而对于大型研究则成本更低。