ArticlePloS one2018
A comparison of smartphone and paper data-collection tools in the Burden of Obstructive Lung Disease (BOLD) study in Gezira state, Sudan.
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 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Data Quality and Cost-effectiveness Analyses of Electronic and Paper-Based Interviewer-Administered Public Health Surveys: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Pooled it
- Development and Validation of a Patient-Reported Outcome Questionnaire for Children Undergoing Removable Orthodontic Treatment.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
- Use of Mobile Forms in Low-Resource Areas for Population Health Surveys: Interview and Field Test Study.JMIRx med · 2025Article
- Dynamics in distress and quality of life in patients undergoing radiation therapy: a prospective cohort study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Article
- Time Efficiency, Reliability, and User Satisfaction of the Tooth Memo App for Recording Oral Health Information: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
- Digital health in fragile states in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region: A scoping review of the literature.PloS one · 2023Article
- Awareness and willingness to use HIV oral pre-exposure prophylaxis among people who inject drugs in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: A cross-sectional survey.PLOS global public health · 2022Article
- Integrating Behavior of Children with Profound Intellectual, Multiple, or Severe Motor Disabilities With Location and Environment Data Sensors for Independent Communication and Mobility: App Development and Pilot Testing.JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies · 2021Article
- Electronic data collection for multi-country, hospital-based, clinical observation of maternal and newborn care: EN-BIRTH study experiences.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2021Observational
- Adherence of Mobile App-Based Surveys and Comparison With Traditional Surveys: eCohort Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- Paper Versus Digital Data Collection Methods for Road Safety Observations: Comparative Efficiency Analysis of Cost, Timeliness, Reliability, and Results.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- Analysis of erroneous data entries in paper based and electronic data collection.BMC research notes · 2019Article
- Outbreak analytics: a developing data science for informing the response to emerging pathogens.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2019Review
- Religiosity and sexual abstinence among Nigerian youths: does parent religion matter?BMC public health · 2019Article
- Digital dashboards with paradata can improve data quality where disease surveillance relies on real-time data collection.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionData collection using paper-based questionnaires can be time consuming and return errors affect data accuracy, completeness, and information quality in health surveys. We compared smartphone and paper-based data collection systems in the Burden of Obstructive Lung Disease (BOLD) study in rural Sudan.
methodsThis exploratory pilot study was designed to run in parallel with the cross-sectional household survey. The Open Data Kit was used to programme questionnaires in Arabic into smartphones. We included 100 study participants (83% women; median age = 41.5 ± 16.4 years) from the BOLD study from 3 rural villages in East-Gezira and Kamleen localities of Gezira state, Sudan. Questionnaire data were collected using smartphone and paper-based technologies simultaneously. We used Kappa statistics and inter-rater class coefficient to test agreement between the two methods.
resultsSymptoms reported included cough (24%), phlegm (15%), wheezing (17%), and shortness of breath (18%). One in five were or had been cigarette smokers. The two data collection methods varied between perfect to slight agreement across the 204 variables evaluated (Kappa varied between 1.00 and 0.02 and inter-rater coefficient between 1.00 and -0.12). Errors were most commonly seen with paper questionnaires (83% of errors seen) vs smartphones (17% of errors seen) administered questionnaires with questions with complex skip-patterns being a major source of errors in paper questionnaires. Automated checks and validations in smartphone-administered questionnaires avoided skip-pattern related errors. Incomplete and inconsistent records were more likely seen on paper questionnaires.
conclusionCompared to paper-based data collection, smartphone technology worked well for data collection in the study, which was conducted in a challenging rural environment in Sudan. This approach provided timely, quality data with fewer errors and inconsistencies compared to paper-based data collection. We recommend this method for future BOLD studies and other population-based studies in similar settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.