Comparison of paper-and-pencil versus web administration of the youth risk behavior survey (YRBS): Risk behavior prevalence estimates

Evaluation Review

Volumn 34, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 137-153

  Eaton, Danice K ^a   Brener, Nancy D ^a   Kann, Laura ^a   Denniston, Maxine M ^a   McManus, Tim ^a   Kyle, Tonja M ^b   Roberts, Alice M ^b   Flint, Katherine H ^b   Ross, James G ^b  

^a NATIONAL CENTER FOR CHRONIC DISEASE PREVENTION AND HEALTH PROMOTION   (United States)

^b ICF Macro   (United States)

Author keywords

Adolescent; Risk behavior; Survey mode; Survey research methodology

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ARTICLE; CHILD BEHAVIOR; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HEALTH SURVEY; HIGH RISK BEHAVIOR; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INTERNET; MALE; PAPER; PREVALENCE; PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE; QUESTIONNAIRE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RISK; RISK ASSESSMENT; STATISTICAL MODEL; UNITED STATES; WRITING;

ADOLESCENT; ADOLESCENT BEHAVIOR; CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION (U.S.); CONFIDENCE INTERVALS; DATA COLLECTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERNET; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; ODDS RATIO; PAPER; POPULATION SURVEILLANCE; PREVALENCE; QUESTIONNAIRES; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK-TAKING; UNITED STATES; WRITING;

EID: 77949536428     PISSN: 0193841X     EISSN: 15523926     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0193841X10362491     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Bates, S.C., and J.M. Cox. 2008. The impact of computer versus paper-pencil survey, and individual versus group administration, on self-reports of sensitive behaviors. Computers in Human Behavior 24:903-16.
2. Beebe, T.J., P.A. Harrison, J.A. McRae, Jr., R.E. Anderson, and J.A. Fulkerson. 1998. An evaluation of computer-assisted self-interviewing in a school setting. Public Opinion Quarterly 62:623-32.
3. Biglan, M., E.A. Gilpin, L.A. Rohrbach, and J.P. Pierce. 2004. Is there a simple correction factor for comparing adolescent tobacco-use estimates from school-and home-based surveys? Nicotine & Tobacco Research 6:427-37.
4. Brener, N.D., D.K. Eaton, L. Kann, J.A. Grunbaum, L.A. Gross, T.M. Kyle, and J.G. Ross. 2006. The association of survey setting and mode with self-reported health risk behaviors among high school students. Public Opinion Quarterly 70:354-74.
5. Brener, N.D., L. Kann, S.A. Kinchen, J.A. Grunbaum, L. Whalen, D. Eaton, J. Hawkins, and J.G. Ross. 2004. Methodology of the Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 53:1-13.
6. Denniston, M.M., N.D. Brener, L. Kann, D.K. Eaton, T. McManus, T. Kyle, A. Roberts, K. Flint, and J.G. Ross. Under review. Comparison of Web-based versus paper-and-pencil administration of the Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS): Participation, data quality, and perceived privacy and anonymity by mode of data collection.
7. Denscombe, M. 2006. Web-based questionnaires and the mode effect. Social Science Computer Review 24:246-54.
8. Gfroerer, J., D.Wright, and A. Kopstein. 1997. Prevalence of youth substance use: The impact of methodological differences between two national surveys. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 47:19-30.
9. Hallfors, D., S. Khatapoush, C. Kadushin, K. Watson, and L. Saxe. 2000. A comparison of paper vs. computer-assisted self interview for school alcohol, tobacco, and other drug surveys. Evaluation and Program Planning 23:149-55.
10. Kann, L., N.D. Brener, C.W. Warren, J.L. Collins, and G.A. Giovino. 2002. An assessment of the effect of data collection setting on the prevalence of health risk behaviors among adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Health 31:327-35.
11. Lucia, S., L. Herrmann, and M. Killias. 2007. How important are interview methods and questionnaire designs in research on self-reported juvenile delinquency? An experimental comparison of internet vs paper-and-pencil questionnaires and different definitions of the reference period. Journal of Experimental Criminology 3:39-64.
12. Mangunkusumo, R.T., J.S. Duisterhout, N. de Graaff, E.J. Maarsingh, H. J. de Koning, and H. Raat. 2006. Internet versus paper mode of health and health behavior questionnaires in elementary schools: Asthma and fruit as examples. Journal of School Health 76:80-6.
13. Needle, R., H. McCubbin, J. Lorence, and M. Hochhauser. 1983. Reliability and validity of adolescent self-reported drug use in a family-based study: A methodological report. International Journal of Addictions 18:901-12.
14. Rootman, I., and R.G. Smart. 1985. A comparison of alcohol, tobacco, and drug use as determined for household and school surveys. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 16:89-94.
15. Sudman, S. 2001. Examining substance abuse data collection methodologies. Journal of Drug Issues 31:695-716.
16. U.S. Bureau of the Census. 2006. Current population survey. October. Unpublished tabulations.
17. van de Looij-Jansen, P.M., and E. J. de Wilde. 2008. Comparison of Web-based versus paper-and-pencil self-administered questionnaire: Effects on health indicators in Dutch adolescents. Health Services Research 43:1-13.
18. Vereecken, C.A., and L. Maes. 2006. Comparison of a computer-administered and paper-and-pencil-administered questionnaire on health and lifestyle behaviors. Journal of Adolescent Health 38:426-32.
19. Wang, Y., C. Lee, C. Lew-Ting, C.K. Hsaiao, D. Chen, and W.J. Chen. 2005. Survey of substance use among high school students in Taipei: Web-based questionnaire versus paper-and-pencil questionnaire. Journal of Adolescent Health 37:289-95.
20. Wells, J., and L. Lewis. 2006. Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools and Classrooms: 1994-2005. NCES 2007-020. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
21. Wright, D., W.S. Aquilino, and A.J. Supple. 1998. A comparison of computer-assisted and paper-and-pencil self-administered questionnaires in a survey on smoking, alcohol, and drug use. Public Opinion Quarterly 62:331-53.