Does electronic data collection perform better than paper-based data collection in health research fieldwork? A participatory action research in Zanzibar

Omar Juma Othman, E. Mashayo, Jamison Jones, Kajal Shah, Christine Graham, A. Yong, Ronnie Graham, F. Omar, V. Chan
{"title":"Does electronic data collection perform better than paper-based data collection in health research fieldwork? A participatory action research in Zanzibar","authors":"Omar Juma Othman, E. Mashayo, Jamison Jones, Kajal Shah, Christine Graham, A. Yong, Ronnie Graham, F. Omar, V. Chan","doi":"10.1136/bmjph-2023-000749","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Technological advancement in low-resource settings is opening the gateway to implementation of electronic data collection methods that improve data quality. We examined the concerns to use electronic data collection tool in Zanzibar, codeveloped a tool that addressed the concerns and evaluated the process and limitations of incorporating an electronic data collection tool aside from paper-based during a community-based study in Zanzibar.The science of improvement Plan-Do-Study-Act model guided this mixed-method participatory action research (PAR). From November 2022 to October 2023, 14 data collection team members participated in (1) a consultative workshop with a fishbone analysis to understand their hesitance to use electronic data collection tools for fieldwork (Plan); (2) developing implementation and evaluation plan for the paper-based method (Do); (3) assessing the proportion of errors and challenges faced using paper-based method (Study); and (4) codeveloping, implementing and assessing an electronic data collection tool (Act).Stakeholders were hesitant to use electronic data collection tools because of fear of lost data due to poor internet, insufficient competency with technology due to lack of training, unfamiliarity with technology in general and fear of lost wages. The study revealed that using a paper-based data collection tool during baseline was time-consuming, with 12.8% of responses being errors (2611 errors out of 20 398 responses). However, once implemented, the electronic data collection application was fast and simple, with minimal errors (0.02%). Overall, there is a need to improve devices’ storage capacity devices and provide more training.Using the PAR approach, we understood the concerns with electronic data collection tools, allowed the team to experience the challenges faced with the paper-based collection method, codeveloped an appropriate solution and changed their attitude towards using technology that could increase accuracy and efficiency of their fieldwork.","PeriodicalId":117861,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Public Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjph-2023-000749","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Technological advancement in low-resource settings is opening the gateway to implementation of electronic data collection methods that improve data quality. We examined the concerns to use electronic data collection tool in Zanzibar, codeveloped a tool that addressed the concerns and evaluated the process and limitations of incorporating an electronic data collection tool aside from paper-based during a community-based study in Zanzibar.The science of improvement Plan-Do-Study-Act model guided this mixed-method participatory action research (PAR). From November 2022 to October 2023, 14 data collection team members participated in (1) a consultative workshop with a fishbone analysis to understand their hesitance to use electronic data collection tools for fieldwork (Plan); (2) developing implementation and evaluation plan for the paper-based method (Do); (3) assessing the proportion of errors and challenges faced using paper-based method (Study); and (4) codeveloping, implementing and assessing an electronic data collection tool (Act).Stakeholders were hesitant to use electronic data collection tools because of fear of lost data due to poor internet, insufficient competency with technology due to lack of training, unfamiliarity with technology in general and fear of lost wages. The study revealed that using a paper-based data collection tool during baseline was time-consuming, with 12.8% of responses being errors (2611 errors out of 20 398 responses). However, once implemented, the electronic data collection application was fast and simple, with minimal errors (0.02%). Overall, there is a need to improve devices’ storage capacity devices and provide more training.Using the PAR approach, we understood the concerns with electronic data collection tools, allowed the team to experience the challenges faced with the paper-based collection method, codeveloped an appropriate solution and changed their attitude towards using technology that could increase accuracy and efficiency of their fieldwork.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在实地卫生研究工作中,电子数据收集是否比纸质数据收集更有效?桑给巴尔参与式行动研究
低资源环境中的技术进步为实施电子数据收集方法、提高数据质量打开了大门。我们研究了在桑给巴尔使用电子数据收集工具的顾虑,开发了一种工具来解决这些顾虑,并评估了在桑给巴尔的一项基于社区的研究中,除纸质数据收集工具外,采用电子数据收集工具的过程和局限性。从 2022 年 11 月到 2023 年 10 月,14 名数据收集小组成员参加了(1)咨询研讨会,通过鱼骨分析了解他们对在实地工作中使用电子数据收集工具的犹豫不决(计划);(2)制定纸质方法的实施和评估计划(执行);(3)评估使用纸质方法的错误比例和面临的挑战(研究);以及(4)开发、实施和评估电子数据收集工具(行动)。利益相关者对使用电子数据收集工具犹豫不决,因为他们担心网络不畅导致数据丢失、缺乏培训导致技术能力不足、不熟悉一般技术以及担心工资损失。研究显示,在基线期间使用纸质数据收集工具非常耗时,12.8%的答复存在错误(20 398 个答复中有 2611 个错误)。然而,电子数据收集应用一旦实施,就变得快捷简单,错误率极低(0.02%)。总体而言,需要改进设备的存储容量,并提供更多培训。通过使用 PAR 方法,我们了解了对电子数据收集工具的担忧,让团队体验了纸质收集方法所面临的挑战,制定了适当的解决方案,并改变了他们对使用技术的态度,从而提高了实地工作的准确性和效率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Psychosocial health stigma related to COVID-19 disease among COVID-19 patients in Jordan: a comparative study Evaluating and mapping the evidence that screening for diabetic foot disease meets the criteria for population-wide screening: a scoping review Effectiveness of direct patient outreach with a narrative naloxone and overdose prevention video to patients prescribed long-term opioid therapy in the USA: the Naloxone Navigator randomised clinical trial Social media use and anxiety levels among school adolescents: a cross-sectional study in Kathmandu, Nepal Community childhood obesity assessment in elementary school, anthropometric indices as screening tools: a community cross-sectional study in Indonesia
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1