...
首页> 外文期刊>Annals of family medicine >Data collection outcomes comparing paper forms with PDA forms in an office-based patient survey.
【24h】

Data collection outcomes comparing paper forms with PDA forms in an office-based patient survey.

机译:在基于办公室的患者调查中,数据收集结果将纸质表格与PDA表格进行了比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

PURPOSE: We compared the completeness of data collection using paper forms and using electronic forms loaded on handheld computers in an office-based patient interview survey conducted within the American Academy of Family Physicians National Research Network. METHODS: We asked 19 medical assistants and nurses in family practices to administer a survey about pneumococcal immunizations to 60 older adults each, 30 using paper forms and 30 using electronic forms on handheld computers. By random assignment, the interviewers used either the paper or electronic form first. Using multilevel analyses adjusted for patient characteristics and clustering of forms by practice, we analyzed the completeness of the data. RESULTS: A total of 1,003 of the expected 1,140 forms were returned to the data center. The overall return rate was better for paper forms (537 of 570, 94%) than for electronic forms (466 of 570, 82%) because of technical difficulties experienced with electronic data collection and stolen or lost handheld computers. Errors of omission on the returned forms, however, were more common using paper forms. Of the returned forms, only 3% of those gathered electronically had errors of omission, compared with 35% of those gathered on paper. Similarly, only 0.04% of total survey items were missing on the electronic forms, compared with 3.5% of the survey items using paper forms. CONCLUSIONS: Although handheld computers produced more complete data than the paper method for the returned forms, they were not superior because of the large amount of missing data due to technical difficulties with the hand-held computers or loss or theft. Other hardware solutions, such as tablet computers or cell phones linked via a wireless network directly to a Web site, may be better electronic solutions for the future.
机译:目的:我们在美国家庭医师学会国家研究网络内进行的基于办公室的患者访谈调查中,比较了纸质表格和手持计算机上使用的电子表格收集数据的完整性。方法:我们要求19名家庭助理的医疗助手和护士对60名老年人进行了一项肺炎球菌免疫接种调查,其中30名使用纸质表格,而30名使用电子表格在掌上电脑上进行。通过随机分配,访问员首先使用纸质或电子形式。使用针对患者特征进行了调整的多级分析,并通过实践对表格进行聚类,我们分析了数据的完整性。结果:在预期的1,140份表格中,共有1,003份返回到数据中心。纸质表格的整体退货率(570件中的537件,占94%)比电子表格中的总回报率(570件中的466件,占82%)要好,这是因为电子数据收集以及手提电​​脑被盗或丢失所造成的技术困难。但是,使用纸质表格时,返回表格的遗漏错误更为常见。在返回的表格中,只有3%的以电子方式收集的表格存在遗漏错误,相比之下,在纸上收集的表格则有35%。同样,电子表格中仅丢失了总调查项目的0.04%,而使用纸质表格的调查项目只有3.5%。结论:尽管手持计算机产生的数据比纸质方法更完整,但是由于手持计算机技术上的困难或丢失或失窃,导致大量数据丢失,因此它们并不优越。其他硬件解决方案,例如通过无线网络直接链接到网站的平板电脑或手机,可能是未来更好的电子解决方案。

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