Response rate differences between web and alternative data collection methods for public health research: a systematic review of the literature

2018 ◽  
Vol 63 (6) ◽  
pp. 765-773 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cauane Blumenberg ◽  
Aluísio J. D. Barros
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Public Health Research ◽  
Review Of The Literature ◽  
Data Collection Methods ◽  
Collection Methods

scholarly journals Utilizing asynchronous email interviews for health research: overview of benefits and drawbacks

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle Amri ◽  
Christina Angelakis ◽  
Dilani Logan
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
Data Quality ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Geographic Location ◽  
Public Health Research ◽  
Data Accuracy ◽  
Global Public Health ◽  
Snowball Sampling ◽  
Face To Face

Abstract Objective Through collating observations from various studies and complementing these findings with one author’s study, a detailed overview of the benefits and drawbacks of asynchronous email interviewing is provided. Through this overview, it is evident there is great potential for asynchronous email interviews in the broad field of health, particularly for studies drawing on expertise from participants in academia or professional settings, those across varied geographical settings (i.e. potential for global public health research), and/or in circumstances when face-to-face interactions are not possible (e.g. COVID-19). Results Benefits of asynchronous email interviewing and additional considerations for researchers are discussed around: (i) access transcending geographic location and during restricted face-to-face communications; (ii) feasibility and cost; (iii) sampling and inclusion of diverse participants; (iv) facilitating snowball sampling and increased transparency; (v) data collection with working professionals; (vi) anonymity; (vii) verification of participants; (viii) data quality and enhanced data accuracy; and (ix) overcoming language barriers. Similarly, potential drawbacks of asynchronous email interviews are also discussed with suggested remedies, which centre around: (i) time; (ii) participant verification and confidentiality; (iii) technology and sampling concerns; (iv) data quality and availability; and (v) need for enhanced clarity and precision.

scholarly journals Qualitative Health Research Involving Indigenous Peoples: Culturally Appropriate Data Collection Methods

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy Wright ◽  
Olive Wahoush ◽  
Marilyn Ballantyne ◽  
Chelsea Gabel ◽  
Susan Jack
Keyword(s):  
Data Collection ◽  
First Nations ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Indigenous Communities ◽  
Indigenous Populations ◽  
Policy Statement ◽  
Culturally Appropriate ◽  
Data Collection Methods ◽  
Collection Methods

Historically, health research involving Indigenous peoples has been fraught with problems, including researchers not addressing Indigenous research priorities and then subsequently often failing to utilize culturally appropriate methods. Given this historical precedence, some Indigenous populations may be reluctant to participate in research projects. In response to these concerns, the Government of Canada has developed the Tri-Council Policy Statement (TCPS2): Research Involving the First Nations, Inuit and Métis Peoples of Canada, which stipulates the requirements for research collaborations with Indigenous communities. Utilizing this policy as an ethical standard for research practices, this paper describes, critiques and synthesizes the literature on culturally appropriate oral-data collection methods, excluding interviews and focus groups, for use with Indigenous people in Canada. Results suggest that photovoice, symbol-based reflection, circles and story-telling can be methodologically rigorous and culturally appropriate methods of collecting data with this population. Suggestions are made for researchers wishing to use these methods to promote respectful and collaborative research partnerships with Indigenous peoples in Canada.

A Systematic Review of State Vocational Rehabilitation Agency-Based Literature

2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 352-371 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heike Boeltzig-Brown ◽  
Allison R. Fleming ◽  
Miriam Heyman ◽  
Martha Gauthier ◽  
Julisa Cully ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
Vocational Rehabilitation ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Program Outcomes ◽  
Data Collection Methods ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Rehabilitation Services Administration ◽  
Rehabilitation Agency ◽  
Collection Methods

Purpose:To conduct a systematic review (SR) of 550 studies produced between 1970 and 2008 that focus on programs and/or services provided by state vocational rehabilitation (VR) agencies believed to impact client and/or program outcomes.Method:Authors used a 5-step SR protocol to evaluate and summarize study content and outcomes, study design, and data collection methods.Results:Results indicate that the VR research base is highly varied in terms of the research focus with respect to programs and services, populations, and outcomes and that it spans across a wide range of research designs and data collection methods.Conclusions:The majority of the studies included in this review relied on administrative data, particularly Rehabilitation Services Administration data, and surveys. Only a small number of studies employed some type of experimental design, suggesting a lack of application of this type of research design. Implications and recommendations for future research are discussed.

scholarly journals Data collection methods for studying pedestrian behaviour: A systematic review

2021 ◽  
Vol 187 ◽  
pp. 107329
Author(s):  
Yan Feng ◽  
Dorine Duives ◽  
Winnie Daamen ◽  
Serge Hoogendoorn
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
Data Collection Methods ◽  
Collection Methods

scholarly journals Evaluasi Sistem Informasi Manajemen Puskesmas (Simpus) (Studi Kasus : Puskesmas Induk Di Wilayah Kabupaten Sukoharjo)

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 27
Author(s):  
Dasa Styo Ndaru Utomo ◽  
Sri Hariyati Fitriasih ◽  
Setiyowati Setiyowati
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
Health Center ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Evaluation Process ◽  
Maturity Level ◽  
Management Information ◽  
Public Health Center ◽  
Data Collection Methods ◽  
Collection Methods

The public health center management information system (SIMPUS) is used to provide services at public health center, from patient registration to medical services. There are some inconsistencies regulations happen, so it is needed evaluation using COBIT 4.1 to evaluate the level of capability (As-Is) and draw conclusion.This research uses primary and secondary data collection methods. This study uses primary and secondary data collection methods. The author conducts an evaluation process using Framework COBIT 4.1 domain Acquire and Implement (AI) process Acquire and Maintain Application Software (AI2), Delivery and Support (DS) process Educate and Train Users (DS7) and Monitor and Evaluate (ME) process Monitor and Evaluate IT Performance (ME1). There are 154 respondents with details of AI2 27 respondents, DS7 100 respondents, and ME1 27 respondents. The AI2 questionnaire has 24 questions, DS7 and ME1 have 18 questions. The maturity level of AI2 is 3.29 and DS7 is 2.59, the value of CO maturity is at matury level 3, which means the condition in which the entire process has been documented and has been communicated, and implemented properly, but there is no evaluation process of the system. The ME1 maturity level of 3.58 at matury level 4 means that the computerized process can be monitored and evaluated properly. Based on the expected level, it is concluded that the average expected ideal value for AI2 and DS7 is at level 4 while ME1 is at level 5.Keywords: The public health center management information system (SIMPUS) is used to provide services at public health center, from patient registration to medical services. There are some inconsistencies regulations happen, so it is needed evaluation using COBIT 4.1 to evaluate the level of capability (As-Is) and draw conclusion.This research uses primary and secondary data collection methods. This study uses primary and secondary data collection methods. The author conducts an evaluation process using Framework COBIT 4.1 domain Acquire and Implement (AI) process Acquire and Maintain Application Software (AI2), Delivery and Support (DS) process Educate and Train Users (DS7) and Monitor and Evaluate (ME) process Monitor and Evaluate IT Performance (ME1). There are 154 respondents with details of AI2 27 respondents, DS7 100 respondents, and ME1 27 respondents. The AI2 questionnaire has 24 questions, DS7 and ME1 have 18 questions. The maturity level of AI2 is 3.29 and DS7 is 2.59, the value of CO maturity is at matury level 3, which means the condition in which the entire process has been documented and has been communicated, and implemented properly, but there is no evaluation process of the system. The ME1 maturity level of 3.58 at matury level 4 means that the computerized process can be monitored and evaluated properly. Based on the expected level, it is concluded that the average expected ideal value for AI2 and DS7 is at level 4 while ME1 is at level 5.Keywords : Puskesmas Management Information System, Framework COBIT 4.1, Maturity Level

Data Collection Methods for the Voice Range Profile: A Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 1716-1734
Author(s):  
Grace M. Cutchin ◽  
Laura W. Plexico ◽  
Aurora J. Weaver ◽  
Mary J. Sandage
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
Full Text ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Sound Level ◽  
Data Collection Methods ◽  
Range Profile ◽  
Voice Range ◽  
The Voice ◽  
Collection Methods

Purpose To assess data collection variability in the voice range profile (VRP) across clinicians and researchers, a systematic review was conducted to evaluate the extent of variability of specific data collection points that affect the determination of frequency range and sound level and determine next steps in standardization of a VRP protocol. Method A systematic review was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis checklist. Full-text journal articles were identified through PubMed, Web of Science, Psych Info, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global, Google Scholar, and hand searching of journals. Results A total of 1,134 articles were retrieved from the search; of these, 463 were duplicates. Titles and abstracts of 671 articles were screened, with 202 selected for full-text review. Fifty-four articles were considered eligible for inclusion. The information extracted from these articles revealed the methodology used to derive the VRP was extremely variable across the data points selected. Additionally, there were eight common acoustic measures used for statistical analysis described in included studies that were added as a data point. Conclusions The data collection methods for the VRP varied considerably. Standardization of procedures was recommended for clinicians and researchers.

scholarly journals Protocol for a systematic review of the use of qualitative comparative analysis for evaluative questions in public health research

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Hanckel ◽  
Mark Petticrew ◽  
James Thomas ◽  
Judith Green
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Citation Index ◽  
Qualitative Comparative Analysis ◽  
Public Health Intervention ◽  
Public Health Research ◽  
Intervention Research ◽  
Health Intervention

Abstract Background There is an increasing recognition that health intervention research requires methods and approaches that can engage with the complexity of systems, interventions, and the relations between systems and interventions. One approach which shows promise to this end is qualitative comparative analysis (QCA), which examines casual complexity across a medium to large number of cases (between 10 and 60+), whilst also being able to generalise across those cases. Increasingly, QCA is being adopted in public health intervention research. However, there is a limited understanding of how it is being adopted. This systematic review will address this gap, examining how it is being used to understand complex causation; for what settings, populations and interventions; and with which datasets to describe cases. Methods We will include published and peer-reviewed studies of any public health intervention where the effects on population health, health equity, or intervention uptake are being evaluated. Electronic searches of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science (incorporating Social Sciences Citation Index and Arts & Humanities Citation Index), Microsoft Academic, and Google Scholar will be performed. This will be supplemented with reference citation tracking and personal contact with experts to identify any additional published studies. Search results will be single screened, with machine learning used to check these results, acting as a ‘second screener’. Any disagreement will be resolved through discussion. Data will be extracted from full texts of eligible studies, which will be assessed against inclusion criteria, and synthesised narratively, using thematic synthesis methods. Discussion This systematic review will provide an important map of the increasing use of QCA in public health intervention literature. This review will identify the current scope of research in this area, as well as assessing claims about the utility of the method for addressing complex causation in public health research. We will identify implications for better reporting of QCA methods in public health research and for reporting of case studies such that they can be used in future QCA studies. Systematic review registration PROSPERO, CRD42019131910

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document