Using the Internet for surveys and health research

Journal of Medical Internet Research

Volumn 4, Issue 2, 2002, Pages 76-94

  Eysenbach, Gunther ^a   Wyatt, Jeremy ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

Clinical Trials; Confidentiality; Data Collection; Ethics, Research; Evaluation Studies; Informed Consent; Internet; Patient Selection; Qualitative Research; Research Design; Research Subjects; Selection bias; Survey research

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL TRIAL; CONSUMER; CULTURAL FACTOR; E-MAIL; HEALTH CARE NEED; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INTERNET; INTERVIEW; MEDICAL ETHICS; MEDICAL RESEARCH; METHODOLOGY; PEER REVIEW; PUBLICATION; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; QUESTIONNAIRE; REVIEW; SAMPLING; SOCIAL ASPECT;

EID: 3242698570     PISSN: 14388871     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2196/jmir.4.2.e13     Document Type: Review

References (55)

1. Eysenbach G, Till JE. Ethical issues in qualitative research on the Internet. British Medical Journal 2001; 323: 1103-5.
2. Eysenbach G, Powell J, Kuss O, Sa ER. Empirical studies assessing the quality of health information for consumers on the world wide web: a systematic review. JAMA. 2002 May 22-29;287(20):2691-700.
3. Greenhalgh T, Taylor R. Papers that go beyond numbers (qualitative research). British Medical Journal 1997; 315: 740-3.
4. Buchanan T, Smith JL. Using the Internet for psychological research: personality testing on the World Wide Web. British Journal of Psychology 1999; 90(1): 125-44.
5. Buchanan T, Smith JL. Research on the Internet: validation of a World-Wide Web mediated personality scale. Behavioural Research Methods in Instrumental Computing 1999; 31: 565-71.
6. Schmidt WC. World-Wide Web survey research: benefits, potential problems, and solutions. Behavioural Research Methods in Instrumental Computing 1997; 29; 274-9.
7. Pealer LN, Weiler RM. Web-based health survey research: a primer. American Journal of Health Behavior 2000; 24: 69-72.
8. Zhang Y. Using the Internet for survey research: a case study. Journal of the American Society of Informatic Sciences 2000; 51; 57-68.
9. Lazar J, Preece J. Designing and implementing Web-based surveys. Journal of Computer Information Systems 1999; 39: 63-7.
10. Kaye BK, Johnson TJ. Research methodology: Taming the cyber frontier: techniques for improving online surveys. Social Science Computer Review 1999; 17: 323-37.
11. Soetikno RM, Mrad R, Pao V, Lenert LA. Quality-of-life research on the Internet: feasibility and potential biases in patients with ulcerative colitis. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 1997; 4: 426-35.
12. Eysenbach G, Diepgen TL. Epidemiological data can be gathered with world wide web [letter]. British Medical Journal 1998; 316: 72.
13. Hilsden RJ, Meddings JB, Verhoef MJ. Complementary and alternative medicine use by patients with inflammatory bowel disease: an Internet survey. Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology 1999; 13: 327-32.
14. Schleyer TK, Forrest JL, Kenney R, Dodell DS, Dovgy NA. Is the Internet useful for clinical practice? Journal of the American Dental Association 1999; 130: 1501-11.
15. Schleyer TK, Forrest JL. Methods for the design and administration of web-based surveys. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 2000; 7: 416-25.
16. Suchard MA, Adamson S, Kennedy S. Netpoints: piloting patient attitudinal surveys on the web. British Medical Journal 1997; 315: 529.
17. Nathanson AT, Reinert SE. Windsurfing injuries: results of a paper- and Internet-based survey. Wilderness & Environmental Medicine 1999; 10: 218-25.
18. Senior C, Phillips ML, Barnes J, David AS. An investigation into the perception of dominance from schematic faces: a study using the World-Wide Web. Behavioural Research Methods in Instrumental Computing 1999; 31: 341-6.
19. Krantz JH, Ballard J, Scher J. Comparing the results of laboratory and World-Wide Web samples on the determinants of female attractiveness. Behavioural Research Methods in Instrumental Computing 1997; 29: 264-9.
20. Wyatt JC. When to use web-based surveys [editorial]. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 2000; 7: 426-9.
21. Friedman CP, Wyatt JC. Evaluation methods in medical informatics. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1997. [Book]
22. Fox S, Rainie L. The online health care revolution: how the Web helps Americans take better care of themselves. Washington: The Pew Internet & American Life Project; 2000 [cited 2001 Sep 20]. Available from: URL: http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/toc.asp?Report=26
23. Cook C, Heath F, Thompson RL. A meta-analysis of response rates in Web- or internet-based surveys. Educational and Psychological Measurement 2000; 60: 821-36.
24. Jones R, Pitt N. Health surveys in the workplace: comparison of postal, e-mail and World Wide Web methods. Occupational Medicine (London) 1999; 49: 556-8.
25. Mavis BE, Brocato JJ. Postal surveys versus electronic mail surveys. The tortoise and the hare revisited. Evaluating Health Professions 1998; 21; 395-408.
26. Polzer JC. Using the Internet to conduct qualitative health research: methodological and ethical issues [dissertation]. University of Toronto; 1998.
27. Cho H, LaRose R. Privacy issues in Internet surveys. Social Science Computer Review 1999; 17: 421-34.
28. Thomas J. The ethics of Carniegie Mellon's 'cyber-porn' study. 1995 [cited 2001 Jan 12]. Available from: URL: http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~jthomas/ ethics.cmu
29. Till JE. Research ethics: Internet-based research. Part 1: on-line survey research. 1997 [cited 2001 Jan 12]. Available from: URL: http://members.tripod. com/~ca916/index-3.html
30. King SA. Researching Internet communities: proposed ethical guidelines for the reporting of results. The Information Society 1996; 12: 119-28.
31. Karlinsky H. Internet survey research and consent. M.D. Computing 1998; 15: 285.
32. World Medical Association. Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects (as amended 2000 Oct). 2000 [cited 2001 Jan 12]. Available from: URL: http://www.wma.net/e/policy/17-c_e.html
33. American Sociological Association. American Sociological Association's Code of Ethics. 1997 [cited 2001 Jan 12]. Available from: URL: http://www.asanet.org/members/ecoderev.html
34. Finn J. An exploration of helping processes in an online self-help group focusing on issues of disability. Health and Social Work 1999; 24: 220-31.
35. Sharf BF. Communicating breast cancer on-line: support and empowerment on the Internet. Women and Health 1997; 26: 65-84.
36. Simes RJ. Publication bias: the case for an international registry of clinical trials. Journal of Clinical Oncology 1986; 4: 1529-41.
37. Chalmers I, Dickersin K, Chalmers TC. Getting to grips with Archie Cochrane's agenda [editorial]. British Medical Journal 1992; 305: 786-8.
38. Chalmers I, Gray M, Sheldon T. Handling scientific fraud. Prospective registration of health care research would help [letter]. British Medical Journal 1995; 311: 262.
39. Horton R, Smith R. Time to register randomised trials. The case is now unanswerable [editorial]. British Medical Journal 1999; 319: 865-6.
40. Tonks A. Registering clinical trials. British Medical Journal 1999; 319: 1565-8.
41. Eysenbach G, Tuische J, Diepgen TL. Evaluation of the usefulness of Internet searches to identify unpublished clinical trials for systematic reviews. Medical Informatics and the Internet in Medicine 2001; 26(3): 203-18.
42. Wilmoth MC. Computer networks as a source of research subjects. Western Journal of Nursing Research 1995; 17: 335-8.
43. Chalmers I, Altman DG. How can medical journals help prevent poor medical research? Some opportunities presented by electronic publishing. Lancet 1999; 353: 490-3.
44. Delamothe T, Smith R, Keller MA, Sack J, Witscher B. Netprints: the next phase in the evolution of biomedical publishing [editorial]. British Medical Journal 1999; 319: 1515-16.
45. McCray AT, Ide NC. Design and implementation of a national clinical trials registry. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 2000; 7: 313-23.
46. Sykes R. Being a modern pharmaceutical company: involves making information available on clinical trial programmes [editorial]. British Medical Journal 1998; 317: 1172.
47. Santoro E, Nicolis E, Franzosi MG, Tognoni G. Internet for clinical trials: past, present, and future. Controlled Clinical Trials 1999; 20: 194-201.
48. Kelly MA, Oldham J. The Internet and randomised controlled trials. International Journal of Medical Informatics 1999; 47: 91-9.
49. Sippel H, Eich HP, Ohmann C. Data collection in multi-center clinical trials via Internet. A generic system in Java. Medinfo 1998; 9(1): 93-7.
50. Sippel H, Ohmann C.A web-based data collection system for clinical studies using Java. Medical Informatics (London) 1998; 23: 223-9.
51. Eich HP, Ohmann C. Generalisation and extension of a web-based data collection system for clinical studies using Java and CORBA. Studies in Health Technology Information 1999; 68: 568-72.
52. Keim E, Sippel H, Eich HP, Ohmann C. Collection of data in clinical studies via Internet. Studies in Health Technology Information 1997; 43(A): 57-60.
53. Smith R. What is publication? [editorial] British Medical Journal 1999; 318: 142.
54. Eysenbach G. Challenges and changing roles for medical journals in the cyberspace age: electronic pre-prints and e-papers. Journal of Medical Internet Research [serial online] 1999 Dec [cited 2001 Jan 12]; 1(2): e9. Available from: URL: http://www.jmir.org/1999/2/e9/
55. Sim I, Owens DK, Lavori PW, Rennels GD. Electronic trial banks: a complementary method for reporting randomized trials. Medical Decision Making 2000; 20: 440-50.