The use of research questionnaires with hearing impaired adults: Online vs. paper-and-pencil administration

BMC Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2012, Pages

  Thorén, Elisabet Sundewall ^a,b   Andersson, Gerhard ^b,c   Lunner, Thomas ^a,b  

^a OTICON A S   (Denmark)

^b LINKÖPING UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^c KAROLINSKA INSTITUTE   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; AUDITORY REHABILITATION; CLINICAL RESEARCH; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; CROSSOVER PROCEDURE; FEMALE; HEARING AID; HEARING HANDICAP INVENTORY FOR THE ELDERLY; HEARING IMPAIRMENT; HOSPITAL; HOSPITAL ANXIETY AND DEPRESSION SCALE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; INTERNATIONAL OUTCOME INVENTORY FOR HEARING AIDS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; ONLINE SYSTEM; QUESTIONNAIRE; RELIABILITY; SATISFACTION WITH AMPLIFICATION IN DAILY LIFE; WRITING;

EID: 84871493319     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14726815     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1472-6815-12-12     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Assessment of subjective outcome of hearing aid fitting: getting the client's point of view. Cox R, Int J Audiol 2003 42 Suppl 1 90 96
2. The attitudes towards loss of hearing questionnaire (ALHQ): acomparison of paper and electronic formats. Saunders G, Forsline A, Jacobs P, J Am Acad Audiol 2007 18 66 77 10.3766/jaaa.18.1.6 17252959 (Pubitemid 46165193)
3. Assessing obsessive compulsive symptoms and cognitions on the internet: evidence for the comparability of paper and Internet administration. Coles ME, Cook LM, Blake TR, Behav Res Ther 2007 9 2232 2240 (Pubitemid 47210946)
4. Response rate and completeness of questionnaires: a randomized study of Internet versus paper-and-pencil versions. Kongsved SM, Basnov M, Holm-Christensen K, Hjollund NH, J Med Internet Res 2007 9 3 25 10.2196/jmir.9.3.e25 17942387
5. Internet vs mailed questionnaires; a controlled study. Leece P, Bhandari M, Sprague S, Swiontkowski MF, Schemitsch EH, Tornetta P, Devereaux PJ, Guyatt GH, J Med Internet Res 2004 24 4 39 6
6. Older adults' performance on speech, spatial, and qualities of hearing scale (SSQ): Test-retest reliability and a comparison of interview and self-administration methods. Singh G, Pichora-Fuller MK, Int J Audiol 2010 49 733 740 10.3109/14992027.2010.491097 20874047
7. Reliability, equivalence and respondent preference of computerized versus paper-and-pencil mental health questionnaires. Wijndaele K, Matton L, Duvigneaud N, Lefevre J, Duquet W, Thomis M, De Bourdeaudhuij I, Philippaerts R, Comput Human Behav 2007 23 4 1958 1970 10.1016/j.chb.2006.02.005 (Pubitemid 46176527)
8. Mode of questionnaire administration can have serious effects on data quality. Bowling A, J Public Health 2005 27 3 281 291 10.1093/pubmed/fdi031 (Pubitemid 41298086)
9. American Psychological Association, Guidelines for computer based tests and interpretation Washington, DC: American Psychological Association 1986
10. Online assessment: desirable or dangerous? Buchanan T, Prof Psychol: Res and Pract 2002 33 2 148 154 (Pubitemid 38341620)
11. Rehabilitative online education versus internet discussion group for hearing Aid users: a randomized controlled trial. Thorén E, Svensson M, Törnqvist A, Andersson G, Carlbring C, Lunner T, J Am Acad Audiol 2011 22 274 285 10.3766/jaaa.22.5.4 21756843
12. Internet world stats http://www.internetworldstats.com/
13. The need for and development of an adaptive listening and communication enhancement (LACE) program. Sweetow RW, Henderson Sabes J, J Am Acad Audiol 2006 17 538 588 10.3766/jaaa.17.8.2 16999250
14. Variables predicting outcomes on listening and communication enhancement (LACE) training. Henderson Sabes J, Sweetow RW, Int J Audiol 2007 46 374 383 10.1080/14992020701297565 17680469 (Pubitemid 47227202)
15. Psychometric evaluation of hearing specific self-report measures and their associations with psychosocial and demographic variables. Öberg M, Lunner T, Andersson G, Audiol Med 2007 5 188 199 10.1080/16513860701560214 (Pubitemid 47537382)
16. Development and initial validation of the "clinical global impression" to measure outcomes for audiological rehabilitation. Öberg M, Wänström G, Hjertman H, Lunner T, Andersson G, Disabil Rehabil 2009 31 1409 1417 10.1080/09638280802621408 19479578
17. The hearing handicap inventory for the elderly: a new tool. Ventry IM, Weinstein BE, Ear Hear 1982 3 128 134 10.1097/00003446-198205000-00006 7095321 (Pubitemid 12008115)
18. Validation of screening tools for identifying hearing-impaired elderly in primary care. Lichtenstein M, Bess F, Logan S, J Am Med Assoc 1988 259 19 2875 2878 10.1001/jama.1988.03720190043029
19. Optimal outcome measures, research priorities, and international cooperation. Cox R, Hyde M, Gatehouse S, Noble W, Dillon H, Bentler R, Stephens D, Arlinger S, Beck L, Wilkerson D, Kramer S, Kricos P, Gagné JP, Bess F, Hallberg L, Ear Hear 2000 21 Suppl 4 106 115
20. Translations of the international outcome inventory for hearing aids (IOI-HA). Cox RM, Stephens D, Kramer SE, Int J Audiol 2002 41 1 3 26 10.3109/14992020209101307 12467365 (Pubitemid 36553872)
21. Norms for the international outcome inventory for hearing aids. Cox RM, Alexander GC, Beyer CM, J Am Acad Audiol 2003 14 8 403 413 14655953
22. Validation of the SADL questionnaire. Cox RM, Alexander GC, Ear Hear 2001 22 151 160 10.1097/00003446-200104000-00008 11324844 (Pubitemid 32290040)
23. The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Zigmond AS, Snaith RP, Acta Psychiatr Scand 1983 67 361 370 10.1111/j.1600-0447.1983.tb09716.x 6880820 (Pubitemid 13098606)
24. Cohen J, Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associations, Inc 1988
25. Internet vs. paper and pencil administration of questionnaires commonly used in panic/agrophobia research. Carlbring P, Brunt S, Bohman S, Austin D, Richards J, Ost LG, Andersson G, Comput Hum Behav 2007 23 1421 1434 10.1016/j.chb.2005.05.002 (Pubitemid 46073585)
26. A comparison of psychometric properties between Internet and paper versions of two depression instruments (BDI-II and MADRS-S) administered to clinical patients. Holländare F, Andersson G, Engström I, J Med Internet Res 2010 12 5 49 10.2196/jmir.1392 21169165
27. Internet administration of the hospital anxiety and depression scale in a sample of tinnitus patients. Andersson G, Kaldo-Sandström V, Ström L, Strömgren T, J Psychosom Res 2003 55 259 262 10.1016/S0022-3999(02)00575-5 12932800 (Pubitemid 38366229)
28. Outcomes of hearing aid fitting for older people with hearing impairment and their significant others. Stark P, Hickson L, Int J Audiol 2004 43 390 398 10.1080/14992020400050050 15515638 (Pubitemid 39214907)
29. Social desirability, anonymity, and Internet-based questionnaires. Joinson A, Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput 1999 31 433 438 10.3758/BF03200723 10502866
30. Test-retest reliability of the hearing handicap inventory for the elderly. Weinstein BE, Spitzer JB, Ventry IM, Ear Hear 1986 7 295 299 10.1097/00003446-198610000-00002 3770324 (Pubitemid 17168730)
31. Clark-Carter D, Doing quantitative psychological research Hove: Psychology Press 1997
32. Hearing Aid fitting outcome: clinical application and psychometric properties of a Swedish translation of the international outcome inventory for hearing aids (IOI-HA). Brännström KJ, Wenneström I, J Am Acad Audiol 2010 21 512 521 10.3766/jaaa.21.8.3 21034698
33. Hospital anxiety and depression scale (HAD): some psychometric data for a Swedish sample. Lisspers J, Nygren A, Söderman E, Acta Psychiatr Scand 1997 96 281 286 10.1111/j.1600-0447.1997.tb10164.x 9350957 (Pubitemid 27428240)
34. Streiner DL, Norman GR, Health measurements scales; a practical guide to their development and use Oxford: Oxford University Press 2nd 1995 23256148