Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29351349›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Survey research with a random digit dial national mobile phone sample in Ghana: Methods and sample quality.

Kelly L'Engle, Eunice Sefa, Edward Akolgo Adimazoya, Emmanuel Yartey, Rachel Lenzi, Cindy Tarpo, Nii Lante Heward-Mills, Katherine Lew, Yvonne Ampeh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing 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

38 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Measuring childhood mortality through mobile phone interviews in Mozambique.Tropical medicine & international health : TM & IH · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

9 authors.

Kelly L'EngleSchool of Nursing and Health Professions, University of San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-1555-0315
Eunice SefaFHI 360, Communicate for Health (C4H) Project, Accra, Ghana.
Edward Akolgo AdimazoyaFHI 360, Communicate for Health (C4H) Project, Accra, Ghana.
Emmanuel YarteyFHI 360, Communicate for Health (C4H) Project, Accra, Ghana.
Rachel LenziFHI 360, Behavioral, Epidemiological, and Clinical Sciences Division, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America.
Cindy TarpoVOTO Mobile, Accra, Ghana.
Nii Lante Heward-MillsVOTO Mobile, Accra, Ghana.
Katherine LewFHI 360, Strategic Information and Monitoring & Evaluation Division, Washington, D.C., United States of America.
Yvonne AmpehGhana Health Service/Ministry of Health, Health Promotion Department, Accra, Ghana.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionGenerating a nationally representative sample in low and middle income countries typically requires resource-intensive household level sampling with door-to-door data collection. High mobile phone penetration rates in developing countries provide new opportunities for alternative sampling and data collection methods, but there is limited information about response rates and sample biases in coverage and nonresponse using these methods. We utilized data from an interactive voice response, random-digit dial, national mobile phone survey in Ghana to calculate standardized response rates and assess representativeness of the obtained sample. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe survey methodology was piloted in two rounds of data collection. The final survey included 18 demographic, media exposure, and health behavior questions. Call outcomes and response rates were calculated according to the American Association of Public Opinion Research guidelines. Sample characteristics, productivity, and costs per interview were calculated. Representativeness was assessed by comparing data to the Ghana Demographic and Health Survey and the National Population and Housing Census.

resultsThe survey was fielded during a 27-day period in February-March 2017. There were 9,469 completed interviews and 3,547 partial interviews. Response, cooperation, refusal, and contact rates were 31%, 81%, 7%, and 39% respectively. Twenty-three calls were dialed to produce an eligible contact: nonresponse was substantial due to the automated calling system and dialing of many unassigned or non-working numbers. Younger, urban, better educated, and male respondents were overrepresented in the sample.

conclusionsThe innovative mobile phone data collection methodology yielded a large sample in a relatively short period. Response rates were comparable to other surveys, although substantial coverage bias resulted from fewer women, rural, and older residents completing the mobile phone survey in comparison to household surveys. Random digit dialing of mobile phones offers promise for future data collection in Ghana and may be suitable for other developing countries.

Indexed as

Cell PhoneAdolescentAdultAgedBiasData CollectionFemaleGhanaHealth SurveysHumansMaleMiddle AgedSample SizeYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID29351349
PMCPMC5774708

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.