DADOS-Survey: An open-source application for CHERRIES-compliant Web surveys

BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making

Volumn 6, Issue , 2006, Pages

  Shah, Anand ^a   Jacobs, Danny O ^b   Martins, Henrique ^b   Harker, Matthew ^b   Menezes, Andreia ^b   McCready, Mariana ^b   Pietrobon, Ricardo ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^b DUKE UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN; COMPUTER PROGRAM; INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY; INTERNET; MEDICAL INFORMATICS; MEDICAL INFORMATION; MEDICAL RESEARCH; REVIEW; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMAN; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INFORMATION PROCESSING; METHODOLOGY; PROCEDURES; PROFESSIONAL STANDARD; QUALITY CONTROL; QUESTIONNAIRE; UNITED STATES; UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL; UTILIZATION;

ACADEMIC MEDICAL CENTERS; BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; DATA COLLECTION; ETHICS COMMITTEES, RESEARCH; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMANS; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INTERNET; PHILADELPHIA; QUALITY CONTROL; QUESTIONNAIRES; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 33749315220     PISSN: 14726947     EISSN: 14726947     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1472-6947-6-34     Document Type: Review

References (12)

1. Ritter P, Lorig K, Laurent D, Matthews K: Internet versus mailed questionnaires: a randomized comparison. J Med Internet Res 2004, 6:e29.
2. Buchanan T, Smith JL: Using the Internet for psychological research: personality testing on the World Wide Web. Br J Psychol 1999, 90 ( Pt 1):125-144.
3. Nathanson AT, Reinert SE: Windsurfing injuries: results of a paper- and Internet-based survey. Wilderness Environ Med 1999, 10:218-225.
4. Davis RN: Web-based administration of a personality questionnaire: comparison with traditional methods. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput 1999, 31:572-577.
5. Gosling SD, Vazire S, Srivastava S, John OP: Should we trust web-based studies? A comparative analysis of six preconceptions about internet questionnaires. Am Psychol 2004, 59:93-104.
6. Wyatt JC: When to use web-based surveys. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2000, 7:426-429.
7. Eysenbach G: Improving the quality of Web surveys: the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES). J Med Internet Res 2004, 6:e34.
8. http://www.stcsig.org/usability/topics/articles/ucd%20_web_devel.html. .
9. Pietrobon R, Shah A, Kuo P, Harker M, McCready M, Butler C, Martins H, Moorman CT, Jacobs DO: Duke Surgery Research Central: an open-source Web application for the improvement of compliance with research regulation. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2006, 6:32.
10. Devereaux PJ, Manns BJ, Ghali WA, Quan H, Guyatt GH: The reporting of methodological factors in randomized controlled trials and the association with a journal policy to promote adherence to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) checklist. Control Clin Trials 2002, 23:380-388.
11. Egger M, Juni P, Bartlett C: Value of flow diagrams in reports of randomized controlled trials. Jama 2001, 285:1996-1999.
12. Moher D, Jones A, Lepage L: Use of the CONSORT statement and quality of reports of randomized trials: a comparative before-and-after evaluation. Jama 2001, 285:1992-1995.