Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24363921›Full record

ArticleJournal of global health2013

mHealth Series: Text messaging data collection of infant and young child feeding practice in rural China - a feasibility study.

Xiaozhen Du, Wei Wang, Michelle Helena van Velthoven, Li Chen, Robert W Scherpbier, Yanfeng Zhang, Qiong Wu, Ye Li, Xiuqin Rao, Josip Car

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of global health, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. The feasibility of text reminders to improve medication adherence in adolescents with asthma.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2016
    Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Xiaozhen DuDepartment of Integrated Early Childhood Development, Capital Institute of Pediatrics, Beijing, China ; Joint first authorship.
Wei WangDepartment of Integrated Early Childhood Development, Capital Institute of Pediatrics, Beijing, China ; Joint first authorship.
Michelle Helena van VelthovenGlobal eHealth Unit, Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Li ChenDepartment of Integrated Early Childhood Development, Capital Institute of Pediatrics, Beijing, China.
Robert W ScherpbierSection of Health and Nutrition, Water, Environment and Sanitation, UNICEF China, Beijing, China.
Yanfeng ZhangDepartment of Integrated Early Childhood Development, Capital Institute of Pediatrics, Beijing, China.
Qiong WuDepartment of Integrated Early Childhood Development, Capital Institute of Pediatrics, Beijing, China.
Ye LiDepartment of Integrated Early Childhood Development, Capital Institute of Pediatrics, Beijing, China.
Xiuqin RaoDepartment of Integrated Early Childhood Development, Capital Institute of Pediatrics, Beijing, China.
Josip CarGlobal eHealth Unit, Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFace-to-face interviews by trained field workers are commonly used in household surveys. However, this data collection method is labor-intensive, time-consuming, expensive, prone to interviewer and recall bias and not easily scalable to increase sample representativeness.

objectiveTo explore the feasibility of using text messaging to collect information on infant and young child feeding practice in rural China.

methodsOur study was part of a clustered randomized controlled trial that recruited 591 mothers of children aged 12 to 29 months in rural China. We used the test-retest method: first we collected data through face-to-face interviews and then through text messages. We asked the same five questions on standard infant and young child feeding indicators for both methods and asked caregivers how they fed their children yesterday. We assessed the response rate of the text messaging method and compared data agreement of the two methods. FINDING: In the text messaging survey, the response rate for the first question and the completion rate were 56.5% and 48.7%, respectively. Data agreement between the two methods was excellent for whether the baby was breastfed yesterday (question 1) (kappa, κ = 0.81), moderate for the times of drinking infant formula, fresh milk or yoghurt yesterday (question 2) (intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC = 0.46) and whether iron fortified food or iron supplement was consumed (question 3) (κ = 0.44), and poor for 24-hour dietary recall (question 4) (ICC = 0.13) and times of eating solid and semi-solid food yesterday (question 5) (ICC = 0.06). There was no significant difference in data agreement between the two surveys at different time intervals. For infant and young child feeding indicators from both surveys, continued breastfeeding at 1 year (P = 1.000), continued breastfeeding at 2 years (P = 0.688) and minimum meal frequency (P = 0.056) were not significantly different, whereas minimum dietary diversity, minimum accepted diet and consumption of iron-rich or iron fortified foods were significantly different (P < 0.001).

conclusionsThe response rate for our text messaging survey was moderate compared to response rate of other studies using text messaging method and the data agreement between the two methods varied for different survey questions and infant and young child feeding indicators. Future research is needed to increase the response rate and improve data validity of text messaging data collection.

Identifiers

PMID24363921
PMCPMC3868816

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.