• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

在数据收集过程中使用一致性检查来识别在线大麻筛查调查中的无效回答。

Using a consistency check during data collection to identify invalid responding in an online cannabis screening survey.

机构信息

Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Institute of Mental Health and Policy Research, Toronto, Canada.

Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.

出版信息

BMC Med Res Methodol. 2022 Mar 13;22(1):67. doi: 10.1186/s12874-022-01556-2.

DOI:10.1186/s12874-022-01556-2
PMID:35282830
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8918323/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Inconsistent responding is a type of invalid responding, which occurs on self-report surveys and threatens the reliability and validity of study results. This secondary analysis evaluated the utility of identifying inconsistent responses as a real-time, direct method to improve quality during data collection for an Internet-based RCT.

METHODS

The cannabis subscale of the Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST) was administered as part of eligibility screening for the RCT. Following the consent procedure, the cannabis subscale was repeated during the baseline interview. Responses were automatically compared and individuals with inconsistent responses were screened out.

RESULTS

Nearly half of those initially eligible for the RCT were subsequently screened out for data quality issues (n = 626, 45.3%). Between-group bivariate analysis found that those screened out (OUT) were significantly older (OUT = 39.5 years (SD = 13.9), IN = 35.7 years (SD = 12.9), p < .001), more had annual incomes less than $20,000CND (OUT = 58.3%, IN = 53.0%, p = .047), used cannabis less often in the past 30 days (OUT = 23.3 days (SD = 9.7), IN = 24.8 days (SD = 11.3), p < .006), and had lower total ASSIST scores at screener (OUT = 19.3 (SD = 8.0), IN = 23.8 (SD = 10.4), p < .001) and baseline (OUT = 17.5 (SD = 7.9), IN = 23.3 (SD = 10.3), p < .001) compared to participants who were screened in to the RCT.

CONCLUSION

Inconsistent responding may occur at high rates in Internet research and direct methods to identify invalid responses are needed. Comparing responses for consistency can be programmed in Internet surveys to automatically screen participants during recruitment and reduce the need for post-hoc data cleaning.

摘要

背景

不一致回答是一种无效回答,发生在自我报告调查中,威胁研究结果的可靠性和有效性。本二次分析评估了识别不一致回答作为一种实时、直接的方法来提高基于互联网 RCT 数据收集质量的效用。

方法

酒精、吸烟和物质参与筛查测试(ASSIST)的大麻子量表作为 RCT 入选标准的一部分进行管理。在同意程序后,在基线访谈期间重复大麻子量表。自动比较响应,筛选出不一致响应的个体。

结果

近一半最初符合 RCT 入选标准的人因数据质量问题而被筛选(n=626,45.3%)。组间双变量分析发现,筛选出的人(OUT)年龄明显较大(OUT=39.5 岁(SD=13.9),IN=35.7 岁(SD=12.9),p<.001),年收入低于 20000 加元的人更多(OUT=58.3%,IN=53.0%,p=0.047),过去 30 天内使用大麻的频率较低(OUT=23.3 天(SD=9.7),IN=24.8 天(SD=11.3),p<.006),且在筛选时的 ASSIST 总分较低(OUT=19.3(SD=8.0),IN=23.8(SD=10.4),p<.001)和基线时(OUT=17.5(SD=7.9),IN=23.3(SD=10.3),p<.001)与入选 RCT 的参与者相比。

结论

互联网研究中可能会出现不一致回答的高发生率,需要直接识别无效回答的方法。比较响应的一致性可以在互联网调查中编程,以便在招募期间自动筛选参与者,并减少事后数据清理的需要。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/373f/8918323/650e5e01d8d4/12874_2022_1556_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/373f/8918323/650e5e01d8d4/12874_2022_1556_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/373f/8918323/650e5e01d8d4/12874_2022_1556_Fig1_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Using a consistency check during data collection to identify invalid responding in an online cannabis screening survey.在数据收集过程中使用一致性检查来识别在线大麻筛查调查中的无效回答。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2022 Mar 13;22(1):67. doi: 10.1186/s12874-022-01556-2.
2
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.在流行地区,服用抗叶酸抗疟药物的人群中,叶酸补充剂与疟疾易感性和严重程度的关系。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217.
3
Reliability of online self-report versions of the Australian Treatment Outcome Profile (ATOP) and Alcohol, Smoking, and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST) among people in residential treatment for substance use problems.用于物质使用问题住院治疗人群的澳大利亚治疗结果简表(ATOP)和酒精、吸烟和物质使用参与筛查测试(ASSIST)在线自报告版本的可靠性。
Addict Behav. 2023 Sep;144:107756. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2023.107756. Epub 2023 May 21.
4
Point and click, carefully: investigating inconsistent response styles in middle school and college students involved in web-based longitudinal substance use research.谨慎点击:调查参与基于网络的纵向物质使用研究的中学生和大学生中不一致的反应方式。
Assessment. 2014 Aug;21(4):427-42. doi: 10.1177/1073191113505681. Epub 2013 Oct 2.
5
Cannabis Use in Adults Who Screen Positive for Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: CANreduce 2.0 Randomized Controlled Trial Subgroup Analysis.注意力缺陷/多动障碍筛查阳性成人中使用大麻:CANreduce 2.0 随机对照试验亚组分析。
J Med Internet Res. 2022 Apr 20;24(4):e30138. doi: 10.2196/30138.
6
Internal consistency and measurement equivalence of the cannabis screening questions on the paper-and-pencil face-to-face ASSIST versus the online instrument.纸质面对面版ASSIST与在线版ASSIST中大麻筛查问题的内部一致性和测量等效性。
Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2015 Mar 8;10:8. doi: 10.1186/s13011-015-0002-9.
7
Reliability and validity of data obtained from alcohol, cannabis, and gambling populations on Amazon's Mechanical Turk.从亚马逊土耳其机器人平台上的酒精、大麻和赌博人群中获取的数据的可靠性和有效性。
Psychol Addict Behav. 2017 Feb;31(1):85-94. doi: 10.1037/adb0000219. Epub 2016 Nov 28.
8
A Web-Based Self-Help Intervention With and Without Chat Counseling to Reduce Cannabis Use in Problematic Cannabis Users: Three-Arm Randomized Controlled Trial.一项针对问题性大麻使用者的基于网络的自助干预(有无聊天咨询)以减少大麻使用的三臂随机对照试验。
J Med Internet Res. 2015 Oct 13;17(10):e232. doi: 10.2196/jmir.4860.
9
An updated protocol to detect invalid entries in an online survey of men who have sex with men (MSM): how do valid and invalid submissions compare?一项用于检测男男性行为者(MSM)在线调查中无效条目的更新协议:有效提交与无效提交情况对比如何?
AIDS Behav. 2015 Oct;19(10):1928-37. doi: 10.1007/s10461-015-1033-y.
10
Unfaithful findings: identifying careless responding in addictions research.不可靠的研究结果:识别成瘾研究中的粗心作答情况。
Addiction. 2016 Jun;111(6):955-6. doi: 10.1111/add.13221. Epub 2015 Dec 14.

引用本文的文献

1
Will patient data collection methods change after a pandemic? A systematic review of the strengths, challenges and opportunities of this new scenario.疫情大流行后患者数据收集方法会改变吗?对这种新情况的优势、挑战和机遇的系统综述。
Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2025 Mar 13;35(1):113. doi: 10.1007/s00590-025-04223-6.
2
Data Verification and Respondent Validity for a Web-Based Sexual Health Survey: Tutorial.基于网络的性健康调查的数据验证与应答者有效性:教程
JMIR Form Res. 2024 Dec 9;8:e56788. doi: 10.2196/56788.
3
Randomized controlled trial of a smartphone app designed to reduce unhealthy alcohol consumption.

本文引用的文献

1
Bots and nots: Safeguarding online survey research with underrepresented and diverse populations.机器人与非机器人:保护针对代表性不足和多样化人群的在线调查研究
Psychol Sex. 2022;13(4):901-911. doi: 10.1080/19419899.2021.1936617. Epub 2021 Jun 7.
2
A Digital Health Tool to Understand and Prevent Cannabis-Impaired Driving Among Youth: A Cross-sectional Study of Responses to a Brief Intervention for Cannabis Use.一种用于了解和预防青少年大麻影响驾驶的数字健康工具:对大麻使用简短干预反应的横断面研究
JMIR Form Res. 2021 Mar 2;5(3):e25583. doi: 10.2196/25583.
3
Out damn bot, out: Recruiting real people into substance use studies on the internet.
一款旨在减少不健康饮酒行为的智能手机应用程序的随机对照试验。
Internet Interv. 2024 May 17;36:100747. doi: 10.1016/j.invent.2024.100747. eCollection 2024 Jun.
4
Doping Prevalence among U.S. Elite Athletes Subject to Drug Testing under the World Anti-Doping Code.在《世界反兴奋剂条例》规定下接受药检的美国精英运动员中的兴奋剂使用流行情况。
Sports Med Open. 2024 May 20;10(1):57. doi: 10.1186/s40798-024-00721-9.
5
Assessing and Improving Data Integrity in Web-Based Surveys: Comparison of Fraud Detection Systems in a COVID-19 Study.评估和提高基于网络的调查中的数据完整性:COVID-19研究中欺诈检测系统的比较
JMIR Form Res. 2024 Jan 12;8:e47091. doi: 10.2196/47091.
6
Response Consistency of Crowdsourced Web-Based Surveys on Type 1 Diabetes.基于网络的众包调查在 1 型糖尿病中的应答一致性。
J Med Internet Res. 2023 Aug 18;25:e43593. doi: 10.2196/43593.
7
Online personalized feedback intervention to reduce risky cannabis use. Randomized controlled trial.在线个性化反馈干预以减少危险的大麻使用。随机对照试验。
Internet Interv. 2021 Nov 14;26:100484. doi: 10.1016/j.invent.2021.100484. eCollection 2021 Dec.
网络招募真实人群参与物质使用研究。
Subst Abus. 2020;41(1):3-5. doi: 10.1080/08897077.2019.1691131. Epub 2019 Dec 10.
4
The Assessment and Impact of Careless Responding in Routine Outcome Monitoring within Mental Health Care.常规心理健康护理中的草率反应评估及其影响。
Multivariate Behav Res. 2019 Jul-Aug;54(4):593-611. doi: 10.1080/00273171.2018.1563520. Epub 2019 Apr 19.
5
Random responses inflate statistical estimates in heavily skewed addictions data.随机响应会使严重偏态成瘾数据中的统计估计值膨胀。
Drug Alcohol Depend. 2018 Feb 1;183:102-110. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2017.10.033. Epub 2017 Dec 9.
6
Unfaithful findings: identifying careless responding in addictions research.不可靠的研究结果:识别成瘾研究中的粗心作答情况。
Addiction. 2016 Jun;111(6):955-6. doi: 10.1111/add.13221. Epub 2015 Dec 14.
7
Internal consistency and measurement equivalence of the cannabis screening questions on the paper-and-pencil face-to-face ASSIST versus the online instrument.纸质面对面版ASSIST与在线版ASSIST中大麻筛查问题的内部一致性和测量等效性。
Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2015 Mar 8;10:8. doi: 10.1186/s13011-015-0002-9.
8
Data Quality in web-based HIV/AIDS research: Handling Invalid and Suspicious Data.基于网络的艾滋病毒/艾滋病研究中的数据质量:处理无效和可疑数据。
Field methods. 2012 Aug 1;24(3):272-291. doi: 10.1177/1525822X12443097. Epub 2012 Apr 26.
9
Identifying careless responses in survey data.识别调查数据中的粗心回答。
Psychol Methods. 2012 Sep;17(3):437-55. doi: 10.1037/a0028085. Epub 2012 Apr 16.
10
Validation of the Alcohol, Smoking And Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST).酒精、吸烟及物质使用情况筛查测试(ASSIST)的验证
Addiction. 2008 Jun;103(6):1039-47. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2007.02114.x. Epub 2008 Mar 28.