Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40080187›Full record

SynthesisEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2025

Will patient data collection methods change after a pandemic? A systematic review of the strengths, challenges and opportunities of this new scenario.

Rafael Dos Reis Guilherme, William Dias Belangero, Robinson Esteves Santos Pires, Vincenzo Giordano

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Rafael Dos Reis GuilhermeFaculdade de Ciências Médicas (FCM), Universidade de Campinas (Unicamp), Rua da Meação 300 Ap 61, Campinas, SP, 033335-045, Brazil. r199733@dac.unicamp.br.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0003-8862-5370
William Dias BelangeroDepartment of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Hospital das Clinicas, Universidade de Campinas (Unicamp), Campinas, SP, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1838-1473
Robinson Esteves Santos PiresDepartment of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Hospital Felício Rocho, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG), Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3572-5576
Vincenzo GiordanoOrthopedics and Traumatology Service, Hospital Municipal Miguel Couto (HMMC-RJ), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4429-312X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe evolution of survey methods in clinical research has been significantly shaped by technological advances and the global upheaval caused by the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic. The use of traditional face-to-face interviews has been augmented, and in some cases replaced, by a range of remote interviewing techniques. This shift requires a comprehensive examination of the unique advantages, limitations, and future applications of these methods.

methodsThis study employs a systematic literature review, guided by PRISMA and Pati's criteria, to examine the nuances of face-to-face, remote, and mixed method interviewing.

resultsFrom an initial corpus of 2802 articles, 2632 were deemed relevant after applying specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. The selection was then refined to 44 articles, which were then subjected to careful analysis. The results are presented as Social Visual Analysis graphs to explicit the relationship between methodologies (each interview technique) and its characteristics.

conclusionThe findings reveal the unique advantages and challenges associated with each interview technique, underscoring the complexity of selecting the most appropriate data collection method for clinical research. In particular, remote interviews are praised for their convenience and high acceptance rates, although they occasionally exhibit lower data quality and potential biases. Mixed-media approaches are emerging as a versatile solution, combining the benefits of different methods to provide a more flexible and comprehensive data collection process.

Indexed as

COVID-19Data CollectionInterviews as TopicHumansPandemicsSARS-CoV-2Clinical researchCOVID-19Data collection methodsRemote interviewsSurvey methodologies

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.