首页> 外文期刊>Controlled clinical trials >A comparison of error detection rates between the reading aloud method and the double data entry method.
【24h】

A comparison of error detection rates between the reading aloud method and the double data entry method.

机译:朗读方法和双重数据输入方法之间的错误检测率比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Data entry and its verification are important steps in the process of data management in clinical studies. In Japan, a kind of visual comparison called the reading aloud (RA) method is often used as an alternative to or in addition to the double data entry (DDE) method. In a typical RA method, one operator reads previously keyed data aloud while looking at a printed sheet or computer screen, and another operator compares the voice with the corresponding data recorded on case report forms (CRFs) to confirm whether the data are the same. We compared the efficiency of the RA method with that of the DDE method in the data management system of the Japanese Registry of Renal Transplantation. Efficiency was evaluated in terms of error detection rate and expended time. Five hundred sixty CRFs were randomly allocated to two operators for single data entry. Two types of DDE and RA methods were performed. Single data entry errors were detected in 358 of 104,720 fields (per-field error rate=0.34%). Error detectionrates were 88.3% for the DDE method performed by a different operator, 69.0% for the DDE method performed by the same operator, 59.5% for the RA method performed by a different operator, and 39.9% for the RA method performed by the same operator. The differences in these rates were significant (p<0.001) between the two verification methods as well as between the types of operator (same or different). The total expended times were 74.8 hours for the DDE method and 57.9 hours for the RA method. These results suggest that in detecting errors of single data entry, the RA method is inferior to the DDE method, while its time cost is lower.
机译:数据输入及其验证是临床研究中数据管理过程中的重要步骤。在日本,通常使用一种称为“朗读”(RA)方法的视觉比较来替代“双数据输入”(DDE)方法。在典型的RA方法中,一个操作员在查看打印纸或计算机屏幕时大声读取先前键入的数据,而另一个操作员将语音与记录在病例报告表(CRF)上的相应数据进行比较,以确认数据是否相同。我们在日本肾脏移植登记处的数据管理系统中比较了RA方法和DDE方法的效率。根据错误检测率和所花费的时间来评估效率。将560个CRF随机分配给两个运算符以进行单个数据输入。进行了两种类型的DDE和RA方法。在104,720个字段中的358个中检测到单个数据输入错误(每个字段的错误率= 0.34%)。由不同操作员执行的DDE方法的错误检测率为88.3%,由同一操作员执行的DDE方法的错误检测率为69.0%,由不同操作员执行的RA方法的错误检测率为59.5%,由同一操作员执行的RA方法的错误检测率为39.9%操作员。在两种验证方法之间以及在操作员类型(相同或不同)之间,这些比率的差异是显着的(p <0.001)。 DDE方法的总花费时间为74.8小时,RA方法的总花费时间为57.9小时。这些结果表明,在检测单个数据输入的错误时,RA方法不如DDE方法,而其时间成本较低。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 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