Cargando…

Building the Evidence Base for Remote Data Collection in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Comparing Reliability and Accuracy Across Survey Modalities

BACKGROUND: Given the growing interest in mobile data collection due to the proliferation of mobile phone ownership and network coverage in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), we synthesized the evidence comparing estimates of health outcomes from multiple modes of data collection. In particul...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Greenleaf, Abigail R, Gibson, Dustin G, Khattar, Christelle, Labrique, Alain B, Pariyo, George W
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: JMIR Publications 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5438451/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28476728
http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/jmir.7331
_version_ 1783237764771217408
author Greenleaf, Abigail R
Gibson, Dustin G
Khattar, Christelle
Labrique, Alain B
Pariyo, George W
author_facet Greenleaf, Abigail R
Gibson, Dustin G
Khattar, Christelle
Labrique, Alain B
Pariyo, George W
author_sort Greenleaf, Abigail R
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Given the growing interest in mobile data collection due to the proliferation of mobile phone ownership and network coverage in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), we synthesized the evidence comparing estimates of health outcomes from multiple modes of data collection. In particular, we reviewed studies that compared a mode of remote data collection with at least one other mode of data collection to identify mode effects and areas for further research. OBJECTIVE: The study systematically reviewed and summarized the findings from articles and reports that compare a mode of remote data collection to at least one other mode. The aim of this synthesis was to assess the reliability and accuracy of results. METHODS: Seven online databases were systematically searched for primary and grey literature pertaining to remote data collection in LMICs. Remote data collection included interactive voice response (IVR), computer-assisted telephone interviews (CATI), short message service (SMS), self-administered questionnaires (SAQ), and Web surveys. Two authors of this study reviewed the abstracts to identify articles which met the primary inclusion criteria. These criteria required that the survey collected the data from the respondent via mobile phone or landline. Articles that met the primary screening criteria were read in full and were screened using secondary inclusion criteria. The four secondary inclusion criteria were that two or more modes of data collection were compared, at least one mode of data collection in the study was a mobile phone survey, the study had to be conducted in a LMIC, and finally, the study should include a health component. RESULTS: Of the 11,568 articles screened, 10 articles were included in this study. Seven distinct modes of remote data collection were identified: CATI, SMS (singular sitting and modular design), IVR, SAQ, and Web surveys (mobile phone and personal computer). CATI was the most frequent remote mode (n=5 articles). Of the three in-person modes (face-to-face [FTF], in-person SAQ, and in-person IVR), FTF was the most common (n=11) mode. The 10 articles made 25 mode comparisons, of which 12 comparisons were from a single article. Six of the 10 articles included sensitive questions. CONCLUSIONS: This literature review summarizes the existing research about remote data collection in LMICs. Due to both heterogeneity of outcomes and the limited number of comparisons, this literature review is best positioned to present the current evidence and knowledge gaps rather than attempt to draw conclusions. In order to advance the field of remote data collection, studies that employ standardized sampling methodologies and study designs are necessary to evaluate the potential for differences by survey modality.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5438451
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher JMIR Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54384512017-06-06 Building the Evidence Base for Remote Data Collection in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Comparing Reliability and Accuracy Across Survey Modalities Greenleaf, Abigail R Gibson, Dustin G Khattar, Christelle Labrique, Alain B Pariyo, George W J Med Internet Res Original Paper BACKGROUND: Given the growing interest in mobile data collection due to the proliferation of mobile phone ownership and network coverage in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), we synthesized the evidence comparing estimates of health outcomes from multiple modes of data collection. In particular, we reviewed studies that compared a mode of remote data collection with at least one other mode of data collection to identify mode effects and areas for further research. OBJECTIVE: The study systematically reviewed and summarized the findings from articles and reports that compare a mode of remote data collection to at least one other mode. The aim of this synthesis was to assess the reliability and accuracy of results. METHODS: Seven online databases were systematically searched for primary and grey literature pertaining to remote data collection in LMICs. Remote data collection included interactive voice response (IVR), computer-assisted telephone interviews (CATI), short message service (SMS), self-administered questionnaires (SAQ), and Web surveys. Two authors of this study reviewed the abstracts to identify articles which met the primary inclusion criteria. These criteria required that the survey collected the data from the respondent via mobile phone or landline. Articles that met the primary screening criteria were read in full and were screened using secondary inclusion criteria. The four secondary inclusion criteria were that two or more modes of data collection were compared, at least one mode of data collection in the study was a mobile phone survey, the study had to be conducted in a LMIC, and finally, the study should include a health component. RESULTS: Of the 11,568 articles screened, 10 articles were included in this study. Seven distinct modes of remote data collection were identified: CATI, SMS (singular sitting and modular design), IVR, SAQ, and Web surveys (mobile phone and personal computer). CATI was the most frequent remote mode (n=5 articles). Of the three in-person modes (face-to-face [FTF], in-person SAQ, and in-person IVR), FTF was the most common (n=11) mode. The 10 articles made 25 mode comparisons, of which 12 comparisons were from a single article. Six of the 10 articles included sensitive questions. CONCLUSIONS: This literature review summarizes the existing research about remote data collection in LMICs. Due to both heterogeneity of outcomes and the limited number of comparisons, this literature review is best positioned to present the current evidence and knowledge gaps rather than attempt to draw conclusions. In order to advance the field of remote data collection, studies that employ standardized sampling methodologies and study designs are necessary to evaluate the potential for differences by survey modality. JMIR Publications 2017-05-05 /pmc/articles/PMC5438451/ /pubmed/28476728 http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/jmir.7331 Text en ©Abigail R Greenleaf, Dustin G Gibson, Christelle Khattar, Alain B Labrique, George W Pariyo. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (http://www.jmir.org), 05.05.2017. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on http://www.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.
spellingShingle Original Paper
Greenleaf, Abigail R
Gibson, Dustin G
Khattar, Christelle
Labrique, Alain B
Pariyo, George W
Building the Evidence Base for Remote Data Collection in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Comparing Reliability and Accuracy Across Survey Modalities
title Building the Evidence Base for Remote Data Collection in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Comparing Reliability and Accuracy Across Survey Modalities
title_full Building the Evidence Base for Remote Data Collection in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Comparing Reliability and Accuracy Across Survey Modalities
title_fullStr Building the Evidence Base for Remote Data Collection in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Comparing Reliability and Accuracy Across Survey Modalities
title_full_unstemmed Building the Evidence Base for Remote Data Collection in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Comparing Reliability and Accuracy Across Survey Modalities
title_short Building the Evidence Base for Remote Data Collection in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Comparing Reliability and Accuracy Across Survey Modalities
title_sort building the evidence base for remote data collection in low- and middle-income countries: comparing reliability and accuracy across survey modalities
topic Original Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5438451/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28476728
http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/jmir.7331
work_keys_str_mv AT greenleafabigailr buildingtheevidencebaseforremotedatacollectioninlowandmiddleincomecountriescomparingreliabilityandaccuracyacrosssurveymodalities
AT gibsondusting buildingtheevidencebaseforremotedatacollectioninlowandmiddleincomecountriescomparingreliabilityandaccuracyacrosssurveymodalities
AT khattarchristelle buildingtheevidencebaseforremotedatacollectioninlowandmiddleincomecountriescomparingreliabilityandaccuracyacrosssurveymodalities
AT labriquealainb buildingtheevidencebaseforremotedatacollectioninlowandmiddleincomecountriescomparingreliabilityandaccuracyacrosssurveymodalities
AT pariyogeorgew buildingtheevidencebaseforremotedatacollectioninlowandmiddleincomecountriescomparingreliabilityandaccuracyacrosssurveymodalities