首页> 外文期刊>Global Health Action >Do surveys with paper and electronic devices differ in quality and cost? Experience from the Rufiji Health and demographic surveillance system in Tanzania
【24h】

Do surveys with paper and electronic devices differ in quality and cost? Experience from the Rufiji Health and demographic surveillance system in Tanzania

机译:用纸和电子设备进行的调查在质量和成本上是否有所不同?坦桑尼亚鲁菲吉卫生和人口监测系统的经验

获取原文
           

摘要

Background: Data entry at the point of collection using mobile electronic devices may make data-handling processes more efficient and cost-effective, but there is little literature to document and quantify gains, especially for longitudinal surveillance systems.Objective: To examine the potential of mobile electronic devices compared with paper-based tools in health data collection.Methods: Using data from 961 households from the Rufiji Household and Demographic Survey in Tanzania, the quality and costs of data collected on paper forms and electronic devices were compared. We also documented, using qualitative approaches, field workers, whom we called ‘enumerators’, and households’ members on the use of both methods. Existing administrative records were combined with logistics expenditure measured directly from comparison households to approximate annual costs per 1,000 households surveyed.Results: Errors were detected in 17% (166) of households for the paper records and 2% (15) for the electronic...
机译:背景:使用移动电子设备在采集时输入数据可能使数据处理过程更高效,更具成本效益,但是很少有文献记录和量化收益,特别是对于纵向监视系统而言。方法:使用坦桑尼亚Rufiji家庭和人口调查的961户家庭的数据,比较了纸质表格和电子设备上数据的质量和成本。我们还使用定性方法记录了我们称为“调查员”的现场工作人员以及家庭成员使用这两种方法的情况。将现有行政记录与直接从比较家庭中测算的物流支出相结合,得出每千户被调查家庭的年度成本大约为1笔。结果:在纸质记录中有17%(166)户发现了错误,在电子产品中发现了2%(15)了。 。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号