User Preferences and Needs for Health Data Collection Using Research Electronic Data Capture: Survey Study.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 MEDICAL INFORMATICS JMIR Medical Informatics Pub Date : 2024-06-25 DOI:10.2196/49785
Hiral Soni, Julia Ivanova, Hattie Wilczewski, Triton Ong, J Nalubega Ross, Alexandra Bailey, Mollie Cummins, Janelle Barrera, Brian Bunnell, Brandon Welch
{"title":"User Preferences and Needs for Health Data Collection Using Research Electronic Data Capture: Survey Study.","authors":"Hiral Soni, Julia Ivanova, Hattie Wilczewski, Triton Ong, J Nalubega Ross, Alexandra Bailey, Mollie Cummins, Janelle Barrera, Brian Bunnell, Brandon Welch","doi":"10.2196/49785","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Self-administered web-based questionnaires are widely used to collect health data from patients and clinical research participants. REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture; Vanderbilt University) is a global, secure web application for building and managing electronic data capture. Unfortunately, stakeholder needs and preferences of electronic data collection via REDCap have rarely been studied.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to survey REDCap researchers and administrators to assess their experience with REDCap, especially their perspectives on the advantages, challenges, and suggestions for the enhancement of REDCap as a data collection tool.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a web-based survey with representatives of REDCap member organizations in the United States. The survey captured information on respondent demographics, quality of patient-reported data collected via REDCap, patient experience of data collection with REDCap, and open-ended questions focusing on the advantages, challenges, and suggestions to enhance REDCap's data collection experience. Descriptive and inferential analysis measures were used to analyze quantitative data. Thematic analysis was used to analyze open-ended responses focusing on the advantages, disadvantages, and enhancements in data collection experience.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 207 respondents completed the survey. Respondents strongly agreed or agreed that the data collected via REDCap are accurate (188/207, 90.8%), reliable (182/207, 87.9%), and complete (166/207, 80.2%). More than half of respondents strongly agreed or agreed that patients find REDCap easy to use (165/207, 79.7%), could successfully complete tasks without help (151/207, 72.9%), and could do so in a timely manner (163/207, 78.7%). Thematic analysis of open-ended responses yielded 8 major themes: survey development, user experience, survey distribution, survey results, training and support, technology, security, and platform features. The user experience category included more than half of the advantage codes (307/594, 51.7% of codes); meanwhile, respondents reported higher challenges in survey development (169/516, 32.8% of codes), also suggesting the highest enhancement suggestions for the category (162/439, 36.9% of codes).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Respondents indicated that REDCap is a valued, low-cost, secure resource for clinical research data collection. REDCap's data collection experience was generally positive among clinical research and care staff members and patients. However, with the advancements in data collection technologies and the availability of modern, intuitive, and mobile-friendly data collection interfaces, there is a critical opportunity to enhance the REDCap experience to meet the needs of researchers and patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":56334,"journal":{"name":"JMIR Medical Informatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11234068/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR Medical Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/49785","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Self-administered web-based questionnaires are widely used to collect health data from patients and clinical research participants. REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture; Vanderbilt University) is a global, secure web application for building and managing electronic data capture. Unfortunately, stakeholder needs and preferences of electronic data collection via REDCap have rarely been studied.

Objective: This study aims to survey REDCap researchers and administrators to assess their experience with REDCap, especially their perspectives on the advantages, challenges, and suggestions for the enhancement of REDCap as a data collection tool.

Methods: We conducted a web-based survey with representatives of REDCap member organizations in the United States. The survey captured information on respondent demographics, quality of patient-reported data collected via REDCap, patient experience of data collection with REDCap, and open-ended questions focusing on the advantages, challenges, and suggestions to enhance REDCap's data collection experience. Descriptive and inferential analysis measures were used to analyze quantitative data. Thematic analysis was used to analyze open-ended responses focusing on the advantages, disadvantages, and enhancements in data collection experience.

Results: A total of 207 respondents completed the survey. Respondents strongly agreed or agreed that the data collected via REDCap are accurate (188/207, 90.8%), reliable (182/207, 87.9%), and complete (166/207, 80.2%). More than half of respondents strongly agreed or agreed that patients find REDCap easy to use (165/207, 79.7%), could successfully complete tasks without help (151/207, 72.9%), and could do so in a timely manner (163/207, 78.7%). Thematic analysis of open-ended responses yielded 8 major themes: survey development, user experience, survey distribution, survey results, training and support, technology, security, and platform features. The user experience category included more than half of the advantage codes (307/594, 51.7% of codes); meanwhile, respondents reported higher challenges in survey development (169/516, 32.8% of codes), also suggesting the highest enhancement suggestions for the category (162/439, 36.9% of codes).

Conclusions: Respondents indicated that REDCap is a valued, low-cost, secure resource for clinical research data collection. REDCap's data collection experience was generally positive among clinical research and care staff members and patients. However, with the advancements in data collection technologies and the availability of modern, intuitive, and mobile-friendly data collection interfaces, there is a critical opportunity to enhance the REDCap experience to meet the needs of researchers and patients.

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
使用研究电子数据采集技术收集健康数据的用户偏好和需求:调查研究。
背景:自填式网络问卷被广泛用于收集患者和临床研究参与者的健康数据。REDCap(研究电子数据采集;范德堡大学)是一个全球性的安全网络应用程序,用于建立和管理电子数据采集。遗憾的是,很少有人研究过利益相关者对通过 REDCap 收集电子数据的需求和偏好:本研究旨在对 REDCap 研究人员和管理人员进行调查,评估他们使用 REDCap 的经验,尤其是他们对 REDCap 作为数据采集工具的优势、挑战和改进建议的看法:我们对美国 REDCap 成员组织的代表进行了网络调查。调查收集了受访者的人口统计学信息、通过 REDCap 收集的患者报告数据的质量、患者使用 REDCap 收集数据的体验,以及关于增强 REDCap 数据收集体验的优势、挑战和建议的开放式问题。描述性和推论性分析方法用于分析定量数据。专题分析用于分析开放式回答,重点关注数据收集体验的优势、劣势和改进:共有 207 位受访者完成了调查。受访者非常同意或同意通过 REDCap 收集的数据是准确的(188/207,90.8%)、可靠的(182/207,87.9%)和完整的(166/207,80.2%)。超过半数的受访者非常同意或同意患者认为 REDCap 易于使用(165/207,79.7%),可以在没有帮助的情况下成功完成任务(151/207,72.9%),并且可以及时完成任务(163/207,78.7%)。对开放式回答的专题分析得出了 8 个主要专题:调查开发、用户体验、调查分发、调 查结果、培训和支持、技术、安全和平台功能。用户体验类别包含了超过半数的优势代码(307/594,占代码总数的 51.7%);同时,受访者表示在调查开发方面遇到了更多挑战(169/516,占代码总数的 32.8%),也提出了最多的改进建议(162/439,占代码总数的 36.9%):受访者表示,REDCap 是一种有价值、低成本、安全的临床研究数据收集资源。临床研究和护理人员以及患者对 REDCap 的数据收集体验普遍持肯定态度。然而,随着数据收集技术的进步,以及现代、直观、移动友好的数据收集界面的出现,我们有机会提升 REDCap 的体验,以满足研究人员和患者的需求。
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
JMIR Medical Informatics
JMIR Medical Informatics Medicine-Health Informatics
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
3.10%
发文量
173
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: JMIR Medical Informatics (JMI, ISSN 2291-9694) is a top-rated, tier A journal which focuses on clinical informatics, big data in health and health care, decision support for health professionals, electronic health records, ehealth infrastructures and implementation. It has a focus on applied, translational research, with a broad readership including clinicians, CIOs, engineers, industry and health informatics professionals. Published by JMIR Publications, publisher of the Journal of Medical Internet Research (JMIR), the leading eHealth/mHealth journal (Impact Factor 2016: 5.175), JMIR Med Inform has a slightly different scope (emphasizing more on applications for clinicians and health professionals rather than consumers/citizens, which is the focus of JMIR), publishes even faster, and also allows papers which are more technical or more formative than what would be published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research.
期刊最新文献
Comparative Study to Evaluate the Accuracy of Differential Diagnosis Lists Generated by Gemini Advanced, Gemini, and Bard for a Case Report Series Analysis: Cross-Sectional Study. Disambiguating Clinical Abbreviations by One-to-All Classification: Algorithm Development and Validation Study. Addressing Information Biases Within Electronic Health Record Data to Improve the Examination of Epidemiologic Associations With Diabetes Prevalence Among Young Adults: Cross-Sectional Study. Toward Better Semantic Interoperability of Data Element Repositories in Medicine: Analysis Study. Practical Aspects of Using Large Language Models to Screen Abstracts for Cardiovascular Drug Development: Cross-Sectional Study.
×
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