首页> 外文期刊>American Journal of Epidemiology >Invited commentary: the art of making questionnaires better.
【24h】

Invited commentary: the art of making questionnaires better.

机译:邀请评论:使问卷更好的艺术。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

A paper by Schilling et al. (Am J Epidemiol 2006;164:1141-4) addresses a crucial issue for epidemiologists: limited peer access to questionnaires. This limited access hampers the ability to evaluate and improve the questions used by investigators and, in turn, the quality of some of the self-reported data. The authors of this commentary analyzed recent publications in core epidemiology journals, finding that self-reported data were used in 64% of articles, but key questions were seldom printed in the article (9%), and open access to complete questionnaires (16%) was rarely provided. Only 47% of articles even discussed validation; of these, only 67% actually validated questions used in the study. The authors join Schilling et al. in making recommendations to improve questionnaire access and collaboration. A first step, proposed before, involves investigators posting their questionnaires on a website concurrently with publication of their article. Journal editors should require online access to full questionnaires for published articles and inclusion of key questions within the article when possible. Funding agencies should take the lead in increasing access and collaboration by developing a searchable database.
机译:Schilling等人的论文。 (Am J Epidemiol 2006; 164:1141-4)解决了流行病学家的一个关键问题:同龄人对问卷的访问有限。这种受限的访问方式会影响评估和改进调查人员所使用的问题的能力,进而影响一些自我报告数据的质量。该评论的作者分析了核心流行病学期刊上的最新出版物,发现64%的文章中使用了自我报告的数据,但文章中很少打印关键问题(9%),并且无法访问完整的问卷(16%) )很少提供。仅有47%的文章甚至讨论了验证。其中,只有67%的人实际验证了研究中使用的问题。作者加入Schilling等。提出建议以改善问卷访问和协作。之前提出的第一步是,调查人员在发表文章的同时将他们的调查问卷发布到网站上。期刊编辑应要求在线访问已发表文章的完整问卷,并在可能的情况下在文章中包含关键问题。资助机构应通过开发可搜索的数据库来带头增加访问和协作。

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