Comparing Electronic Data Capture Methods in Clinical Trials
Author Information
Author(s): Walther Brigitte, Hossin Safayet, Townend John, Abernethy Neil, Parker David, Jeffries David
Primary Institution: Medical Research Council, Fajara, The Gambia
Hypothesis
This study compares four electronic data capture (EDC) methods with the conventional approach regarding data capture duration and accuracy.
Conclusion
EDC solutions can achieve similar data accuracy to paper-based methods while reducing the time from data collection to database lock.
Supporting Evidence
- Error rates for EDC methods decreased significantly over time.
- Data accuracy for netbook and tablet PC was comparable to the conventional method.
- EDC methods took longer to conduct interviews than the standard method.
Takeaway
This study looked at different ways to collect data for health research. It found that using electronic tools can be just as good as paper, but it takes a bit longer.
Methodology
The study used a Graeco Latin square design to compare error rates and interview durations across four EDC methods and a standard paper-based method.
Potential Biases
Selection bias may exist as interviewers were randomly selected from a pool of candidates nominated by MRC programs.
Limitations
The study was limited to a short duration and may not reflect long-term performance of EDC methods in the field.
Participant Demographics
Five interviewers, one female and four male, aged 29 to 46, with varying experience in fieldwork.
Statistical Information
P-Value
p<0.05
Confidence Interval
CI95%: 3.5–7.2%
Statistical Significance
p<0.05
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website