Mode of data elicitation, acquisition and response to surveys: a systematic review.

Hood, Kerenza; Robling, Michael; Ingledew, David K.; Gillespie, David; Greene, Giles; Ivins, Rhys; Russell, I.F.; Sayers, Adrian; Shaw, Christine; Williams, Joseph

doi:10.3310/hta16270

Cited by 36 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 96 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…There is evidence that single-item measures are more likely to be biased than multiquestion measures. 117 We do not feel that the results for the other questionnaires are likely to be biased.…”

Section: Main Analysismentioning

confidence: 95%

A feasibility randomised controlled trial of a motivational interviewing-based intervention for weight loss maintenance in adults

Simpson

McNamara

Shaw

et al. 2015

Health Technol Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This journal is a member of and subscribes to the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (www.publicationethics.org/).Editorial contact: nihredit@southampton.ac.ukThe full HTA archive is freely available to view online at www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/hta. Print-on-demand copies can be purchased from the report pages of the NIHR Journals Library website: www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk Criteria for inclusion in the Health Technology Assessment journalReports are published in Health Technology Assessment (HTA) if (1) they have resulted from work for the HTA programme, and (2) they are of a sufficiently high scientific quality as assessed by the reviewers and editors.Reviews in Health Technology Assessment are termed 'systematic' when the account of the search appraisal and synthesis methods (to minimise biases and random errors) would, in theory, permit the replication of the review by others. HTA programmeThe HTA programme, part of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), was set up in 1993. It produces high-quality research information on the effectiveness, costs and broader impact of health technologies for those who use, manage and provide care in the NHS. 'Health technologies' are broadly defined as all interventions used to promote health, prevent and treat disease, and improve rehabilitation and long-term care.The journal is indexed in NHS Evidence via its abstracts included in MEDLINE and its Technology Assessment Reports inform National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance. HTA research is also an important source of evidence for National Screening Committee (NSC) policy decisions.For more information about the HTA programme please visit the website: http://www.nets.nihr.ac.uk/programmes/hta This reportThe research reported in this issue of the journal was funded by the HTA programme as project number 08/44/04. The contractual start date was in September 2010. The draft report began editorial review in April 2014 and was accepted for publication in September 2014. The authors have been wholly responsible for all data collection, analysis and interpretation, and for writing up their work. The HTA editors and publisher have tried to ensure the accuracy of the authors' report and would like to thank the reviewers for their constructive comments on the draft document. However, they do not accept liability for damages or losses arising from material published in this report.This report presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). The views and opinions expressed by authors in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the NHS, the NIHR, NETSCC, the HTA programme or the Department of Health. If there are verbatim quotations included in this publication the views and opinions expressed by the interviewees are those of the interviewees and do not necessarily reflect those of the authors, those of the NHS, the NIHR, NETSCC, the HTA programme or the Department of Health. Published by...

show abstract

Section: Main Analysismentioning

confidence: 95%

A feasibility randomised controlled trial of a motivational interviewing-based intervention for weight loss maintenance in adults

Simpson

McNamara

Shaw

et al. 2015

Health Technol Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several studies have reported greater underestimation of weight (and BMI) with remote SR collection methods than with face-to-face interviews (Hood et al 2012). However, we observed a good agreement between the BMI classifications derived from SR and measured height and weight (j = 0.939), with just six participants being wrongly classified when SR data were used.…”

Section: Concordance Of Bmi Classificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

How reliable is internet-based self-reported identity, socio-demographic and obesity measures in European adults?

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In e-health intervention studies, there are concerns about the reliability of internet-based, self-reported (SR) data and about the potential for identity fraud. This study introduced and tested a novel procedure for assessing the validity of internet-based, SR identity and validated anthropometric and demographic data via measurements performed face-to-face in a validation study (VS). Participants (n = 140) from seven European countries, participating in the Food4Me intervention study which aimed to test the efficacy of personalised nutrition approaches delivered via the internet, were invited to take part in the VS. Participants visited a research centre in each country within 2 weeks of providing SR data via the internet. Participants received detailed instructions on how to perform each measurement. Individual's identity was checked visually and by repeated collection and analysis of buccal cell DNA for 33 genetic variants. Validation of identity using genomic information showed perfect concordance between SR and VS. Similar results were found for demographic data (age and sex verification). We observed strong intra-class correlation coefficients between SR and VS for anthropometric data (height 0.990, weight 0.994 and BMI 0.983). However, internet-based SR weight was under-reported (D -0.70 kg [-3.6 to 2.1], p \ 0.0001) and, therefore, BMI was lower for SR data (D -0.29 kg m -2 [-1.5 to 1.0], p \ 0.0001). BMI classification was correct in 93 % of cases. We demonstrate the utility of genotype information for detection of possible identity fraud in e-health studies and confirm the reliability Carlos Celis-Morales and Katherine M. Livingstone have contributed equally to this work.On behalf of the Food4Me Study.Mention of trade names or commercial products in this publication is solely for the purpose of providing specific information and does not imply recommendation or endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Electronic supplementary material 123Genes Nutr (2015) 10:28 DOI 10.1007/s12263-015-0476-0 of internet-based, SR anthropometric and demographic data collected in the Food4Me study.Trial registration: NCT01530139 (http://clinicaltrials.gov/ show/NCT01530139).

show abstract

“…There is evidence from the MODE-ARTS systematic review that pragmatic changes of administrator 'at random' are unlikely to bias outcomes within placebo-controlled trials. 167 …”

Section: Mode Of Data Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Folate Augmentation of Treatment – Evaluation for Depression (FolATED): randomised trial and economic evaluation

Bedson

Bell

Carr

et al. 2014

Health Technology Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mode of data elicitation, acquisition and response to surveys: a systematic review.

Cited by 36 publications

References 96 publications

A feasibility randomised controlled trial of a motivational interviewing-based intervention for weight loss maintenance in adults

A feasibility randomised controlled trial of a motivational interviewing-based intervention for weight loss maintenance in adults

How reliable is internet-based self-reported identity, socio-demographic and obesity measures in European adults?

Folate Augmentation of Treatment – Evaluation for Depression (FolATED): randomised trial and economic evaluation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About