Greenleaf Abigail R, Gibson Dustin G, Khattar Christelle, Labrique Alain B, Pariyo George W
Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Department of Population, Family and Reproductive Health, Baltimore, MD, United States.
Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Department of International Health, Baltimore, MD, United States.
J Med Internet Res. 2017 May 5;19(5):e140. doi: 10.2196/jmir.7331.
Given the growing interest in mobile data collection due to the proliferation of mobile phone ownership and network coverage in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), we synthesized the evidence comparing estimates of health outcomes from multiple modes of data collection. In particular, we reviewed studies that compared a mode of remote data collection with at least one other mode of data collection to identify mode effects and areas for further research.
The study systematically reviewed and summarized the findings from articles and reports that compare a mode of remote data collection to at least one other mode. The aim of this synthesis was to assess the reliability and accuracy of results.
Seven online databases were systematically searched for primary and grey literature pertaining to remote data collection in LMICs. Remote data collection included interactive voice response (IVR), computer-assisted telephone interviews (CATI), short message service (SMS), self-administered questionnaires (SAQ), and Web surveys. Two authors of this study reviewed the abstracts to identify articles which met the primary inclusion criteria. These criteria required that the survey collected the data from the respondent via mobile phone or landline. Articles that met the primary screening criteria were read in full and were screened using secondary inclusion criteria. The four secondary inclusion criteria were that two or more modes of data collection were compared, at least one mode of data collection in the study was a mobile phone survey, the study had to be conducted in a LMIC, and finally, the study should include a health component.
Of the 11,568 articles screened, 10 articles were included in this study. Seven distinct modes of remote data collection were identified: CATI, SMS (singular sitting and modular design), IVR, SAQ, and Web surveys (mobile phone and personal computer). CATI was the most frequent remote mode (n=5 articles). Of the three in-person modes (face-to-face [FTF], in-person SAQ, and in-person IVR), FTF was the most common (n=11) mode. The 10 articles made 25 mode comparisons, of which 12 comparisons were from a single article. Six of the 10 articles included sensitive questions.
This literature review summarizes the existing research about remote data collection in LMICs. Due to both heterogeneity of outcomes and the limited number of comparisons, this literature review is best positioned to present the current evidence and knowledge gaps rather than attempt to draw conclusions. In order to advance the field of remote data collection, studies that employ standardized sampling methodologies and study designs are necessary to evaluate the potential for differences by survey modality.
鉴于中低收入国家手机拥有率和网络覆盖率不断提高,人们对移动数据收集的兴趣日益浓厚,我们综合了相关证据,比较了多种数据收集方式对健康结果的估计。特别是,我们回顾了将一种远程数据收集方式与至少一种其他数据收集方式进行比较的研究,以确定方式效应和进一步研究的领域。
本研究系统回顾并总结了将一种远程数据收集方式与至少一种其他方式进行比较的文章和报告中的研究结果。本综合分析的目的是评估结果的可靠性和准确性。
系统检索了七个在线数据库,以查找与中低收入国家远程数据收集相关的原始文献和灰色文献。远程数据收集包括交互式语音应答(IVR)、计算机辅助电话访谈(CATI)、短信服务(SMS)、自填式问卷(SAQ)和网络调查。本研究的两位作者审查了摘要,以确定符合主要纳入标准的文章。这些标准要求调查通过手机或固定电话从受访者那里收集数据。符合主要筛选标准的文章全文阅读,并根据次要纳入标准进行筛选。四个次要纳入标准是比较两种或更多种数据收集方式、研究中的至少一种数据收集方式是手机调查、研究必须在中低收入国家进行,最后,研究应包括健康相关内容。
在筛选的11568篇文章中,本研究纳入了10篇文章。确定了七种不同的远程数据收集方式:CATI、SMS(单次访谈和模块化设计)、IVR、SAQ和网络调查(手机和个人电脑)。CATI是最常见的远程方式(n = 5篇文章)。在三种面对面方式(面对面[FTF]、当面SAQ和当面IVR)中,FTF是最常见的(n = 11)方式。这10篇文章进行了25次方式比较,其中12次比较来自同一篇文章。10篇文章中有6篇包含敏感问题。
本文献综述总结了中低收入国家远程数据收集的现有研究。由于结果的异质性和比较数量有限,本文献综述最适合呈现当前的证据和知识差距,而不是试图得出结论。为了推动远程数据收集领域的发展,需要采用标准化抽样方法和研究设计的研究来评估不同调查方式产生差异的可能性。