Quality of reporting web-based and non-web-based survey studies: What authors, reviewers and consumers should consider

PLoS ONE

Volumn 13, Issue 6, 2018, Pages

  Turk, Tarek ^a   Elhady, Mohamed Tamer ^b   Rashed, Sherwet ^c   Abdelkhalek, Mariam ^d   Nasef, Somia Ahmed ^e   Khallaf, Ashraf Mohamed ^f   Mohammed, Abdelrahman Tarek ^g   Attia, Andrew Wassef ^h   Adhikari, Purushottam ⁱ   Amin, Mohamed Alsabbahi ^b   Hirayama, Kenji ^j   Huy, Nguyen Tien ^j,k  

^a DAMASCUS UNIVERSITY   (Syrian Arab Republic)

^b ZAGAZIG UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Egypt)

^c HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^d TANTA UNIVERSITY   (Egypt)

^e Maternity and Children's Hospital   (Saudi Arabia)

^f CAIRO UNIVERSITY   (Egypt)

^g AL AZHAR UNIVERSITY   (Egypt)

^h Ain Shams University Hospital   (Egypt)

ⁱ Department of Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery Gandaki Medical College Teaching Hospital   (Nepal)

^j NAGASAKI UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^k TON DUC THANG UNIVERSITY   (Viet Nam)

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADVERTISING; ARTICLE; CHECKLIST; CHERRY; CONSUMER; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INFORMED CONSENT; NONHUMAN; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; QUESTIONNAIRE; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; DATA MINING; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; INTERNET;

DATA MINING; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; INTERNET;

EID: 85048809996     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0194239     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Nass SJ, Levit LA, Gostin LO. Beyond the HIPAA privacy rule: enhancing privacy, improving health through research: National Academies Press; 2009.
2. Rossi PH, Wright JD, Anderson AB. Handbook of survey research: Academic Press; 2013.
3. Misro A, Hussain M, Jones T, Baxter M, Khanduja V. A quick guide to survey research. The Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England. 2014; 96(1):87–.
4. Simera I, Moher D, Hirst A, Hoey J, Schulz KF, Altman DG. Transparent and accurate reporting increases reliability, utility, and impact of your research: reporting guidelines and the EQUATOR Network. BMC Med. 2010; 8(1):1.
5. Simera I, Altman DG, Moher D, Schulz KF, Hoey J. Guidelines for reporting health research: the EQUATOR network’s survey of guideline authors. PLoS Med. 2008; 5(6):e139. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0050139 PMID: 18578566
6. Popham K, Calo WA, Carpentier MY, Chen NE, Kamrudin SA, Le Y-CL, et al. Reporting guidelines: optimal use in preventive medicine and public health. American journal of preventive medicine. 2012; 43(4): e31–e42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2012.06.031 PMID: 22992369
7. Nicholls SG, Langan SM, Benchimol EI. Reporting and Transparency in Big Data: The Nexus of Ethics and Methodology. The Ethics of Biomedical Big Data: Springer; 2016. p. 339–65.
8. Bennett C, Khangura S, Brehaut JC, Graham ID, Moher D, Potter BK, et al. Reporting guidelines for survey research: an analysis of published guidance and reporting practices. PLoS Med. 2011; 8(8): e1001069.
9. Chan A-W, Altman DG. Identifying outcome reporting bias in randomised trials on PubMed: review of publications and survey of authors. bmj. 2005; 330(7494):753. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.38356.424606.8F PMID: 15681569
10. Altman DG, Simera I. Responsible reporting of health research studies: transparent, complete, accurate and timely. Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy. 2009:dkp410.
11. Macleod MR, Michie S, Roberts I, Dirnagl U, Chalmers I, Ioannidis JP, et al. Biomedical research: increasing value, reducing waste. The Lancet. 2014; 383(9912):101–4.
12. Vernooij RW, Sanabria AJ, Solà I, Alonso-Coello P, García LM. Guidance for updating clinical practice guidelines: a systematic review of methodological handbooks. Implementation Science. 2014; 9(1):1.
13. Shih T-H, Fan X. Comparing response rates from web and mail surveys: A meta-analysis. Field methods. 2008; 20(3):249–71.
14. Grimshaw J. SURGE (The SUrvey Reporting GuidelinE). Guidelines for Reporting Health Research: A User’s Manual. 2014:206–13.
15. Eysenbach G. Correction: Improving the Quality of Web Surveys: the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES). Journal of medical Internet research. 2012; 14(1).
16. Fuller T, Pearson M, Peters J, Anderson R. What affects authors’ and editors’ use of reporting guidelines? Findings from an online survey and qualitative interviews. PLoS ONE. 2015; 10(4):e0121585. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0121585 PMID: 25875918
17. Altman DG, Moher D, Schulz KF. Improving the reporting of randomised trials: the CONSORT Statement and beyond. Statistics in medicine. 2012; 31(25):2985–97. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.5402PMID: 22903776
18. Simera I, Moher D, Hoey J, Schulz KF, Altman DG. A catalogue of reporting guidelines for health research. European journal of clinical investigation. 2010; 40(1):35–53. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.13652362.2009.02234.x PMID: 20055895
19. Moher D, Weeks L, Ocampo M, Seely D, Sampson M, Altman DG, et al. Describing reporting guidelines for health research: a systematic review. Journal of clinical epidemiology. 2011; 64(7):718–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.09.013 PMID: 21216130
20. McColl E, Jacoby A, Thomas L, Soutter J, Bamford C, Steen N, et al. Design and use of questionnaires: a review of best practice applicable to surveys of health service staff and patients. Health Technology Assessment. 2002; 5(31).
21. Bowling A. Research methods in health: investigating health and health services: McGraw-Hill Education (UK); 2014.
22. Collins FS, Tabak LA. NIH plans to enhance reproducibility. Nature. 2014; 505(7485):612. PMID: 24482835
23. Siegel V. Reproducibility in research. Disease Models and Mechanisms. 2011; 4(3):279–80. https://doi.org/10.1242/dmm.008037 PMID: 21555327
24. Barlett JE, Kotrlik JW, Higgins CC. Organizational research: Determining appropriate sample size in survey research. Information technology, learning, and performance journal. 2001; 19(1):43.
25. Brenner V. Generalizability issues in Internet-based survey research: Implications for the Internet addiction controversy. Online social sciences. 2002:93–113.
26. Bowling A. Mode of questionnaire administration can have serious effects on data quality. Journal of public health. 2005; 27(3):281–91. https://doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fdi031 PMID: 15870099
27. Oppenheim AN. Questionnaire design. Interviewing and Attitude measurement. 1992; 2.
28. Frey JH, Oishi SM. How To Conduct Interviews by Telephone and In Person. The Survey Kit, Volume 4: ERIC; 1995.
29. Aiga H. Bombarding people with questions: a reconsideration of survey ethics. Bulletin of the World Health Organization. 2007; 85(11):823–. https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.07.047381 PMID: 18038067
30. Buchanan EA, Hvizdak EE. Online survey tools: Ethical and methodological concerns of human research ethics committees. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics. 2009; 4(2):37–48. https://doi.org/10.1525/jer.2009.4.2.37 PMID: 19480590
31. Ess C. Ethical decision-making and Internet research: Recommendations from the aoir ethics working committee. Readings in virtual research ethics: Issues and controversies: Information Science Publishing, Hershey, PA, USA; 2002.
32. Emanuel EJ. The Oxford textbook of clinical research ethics: OUP USA; 2011.
33. Groth SW. Honorarium or coercion: use of incentives for participants in clinical research. The Journal of the New York State Nurses’ Association. 2010; 41(1):11.
34. Kelley K, Clark B, Brown V, Sitzia J. Good practice in the conduct and reporting of survey research. International Journal for Quality in Health Care. 2003; 15(3):261–6. PMID: 12803354
35. Oldendick RW. Survey research ethics. Handbook of Survey Methodology for the Social Sciences: Springer; 2012. p. 23–35.
36. Asch DA, Jedrziewski MK, Christakis NA. Response rates to mail surveys published in medical journals. Journal of clinical epidemiology. 1997; 50(10):1129–36. PMID: 9368521
37. Frohlich MT. Techniques for improving response rates in OM survey research. Journal of Operations Management. 2002; 20(1):53–62.
38. Marcus B, Bosnjak M, Lindner S, Pilischenko S, Schütz A. Compensating for low topic interest and long surveys a field experiment on nonresponse in web surveys. Social Science Computer Review. 2007; 25 (3):372–83.