The aims of the present study were to incorporate and to validate the electronic capture of participant-related outcomes into the Oral Survey-B System, which was originally developed for the electronic capture of clinical data. The validation process compared the performances of electronic and handwritten data captures. The hypothesis of noninferiority would be established if participants performed electronic data capture of the questionnaire survey with an effectiveness of at least 95% of that of handwritten data capture. In this multicenter, randomized, one-period crossover study design, participants (n = 261) were allocated to start with either electronic or handwritten data capture. The incorporation of the electronic self-completed questionnaire into the Oral Survey-B System was successful. The validation of the electronic questionnaire was performed by participants aged from 18 to 75 years. The interrater reliability of participants performing electronic and handwritten data capture of nonclinical assessments per questionnaire and per entry showed a kappa value of 0.72 (95% CI: 0.53-0.94). The noninferiority of electronic data capture in relation to that of the handwritten data capture and transfer was shown (p < 0.0001; 95% CI: 1.47-2.99). In conclusion, the electronic capture of participant-related outcomes with the Oral Survey-B System, originally designed for capture of clinical data, was validated. The electronic data capture was accurate and limited the number of errors. The participants were able to perform electronic data capture effectively, supporting its implementation in further National Oral Health Surveys. With the consideration of participant preference and time savings, this could lead to the implementation of electronic data capture worldwide in National Oral Health Surveys.

Keywords:
Electronic data records, Epidemiology, Oral health services, Oral health surveys, Dental informatics/bioinformatics
1.
Agresti A, Min Y: Simple improved confidence interval for the comparing matched Proportions. Stat Med 2005;24:729-740.
2.
BASCD - The British Association for the Study of Community Dentistry Oral Health Surveys. http://www.bascd.org/downloads/BASCD5yr9900.htm (accessed September 2015).
3.
Bushnell DM, Martin ML, Parasuraman B: Electronic versus paper questionnaires: a further comparison in persons with asthma. J Asthma 2003;40:751-762.
4.
Carvalho JC, Bottenberg P, Declerck D, Van Nieuwenhuysen JP, Vanobbergen J, Nyssen M: Validity of an information and communication technology system for data capture in epidemiological studies. Caries Res 2011;45:287-293.
5.
Carvalho JC: Case report form for oral health assessments: methodological considerations. Braz Oral Res 2012;26:10-16.
6.
Carvalho JC, Mestrinho HD, Stevens S, van Wijk AJ: Do oral health conditions adversely impact young adults? Caries Res 2015;49:266-274.
7.
Coons SJ, Gwaltney CJ, Hays RD, Lundy JJ, Sloan JA, Revicki DA, Lenderking WR, Cella D, Basch E; ISPOR ePRO Task Force: Recommendations on evidence needed to support measurement equivalence between electronic and paper-based patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures: ISPOR ePRO Good Research Practices Task Force report. Value Health 2009;12:419-429.
8.
Declerck D, Bottenberg P, Carvalho C, Declerck C, De Vos E, Vanden Abbeele A, Van Nieuwenhuysen JP, Vanobbergen J, Bogaerts K: Development and implementation of an oral health data registration and evaluation system for the Belgian population. J Dent Oral Craniofacial Epidemiol 2013;1:45-54.
9.
Forsell M, Häggstrom M, Johansson O, Sjögren P: A personal digital assistant application (Mobil Dent) for dental fieldwork data collection, information management and database handling. Br Dent J 2008;205:1-4.
10.
Gritzalis S, Lambrinoudakis C, Lekkas D, Deftereos S: Technical guidelines for enhancing privacy and data protection in modern electronic medical environments. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed 2005;9:413-423.
11.
INAMI - Institute national d'assurance maladie-invalidité: Études sur la santé bucco-dentaire de la population belge. Le rapport 2012-2014. http://www.inami.fgov.be/fr/publications/Pages/etudes-sante-bucco-dentaire-belge.aspx#.VfcfiPboudI (accessed September 2015).
12.
Ivanov K: Quality control of information: on the concept of accuracy of information in data banks and in management information systems; thesis, Stockholm, 1972.
13.
Mitchel JT, Kim YJ, Choi J, Park G, Cappi S, Horn D, Kist M, D Agostino RB Jr: Evaluation of data entry errors and data changes to an electronic data capture clinical trial database. Drug Inf J 2011;45:421-430.
14.
Monyarit S, Pan-ngum W, Lawpoolsri S, Yimsamran S, Pongnumkul S, Kaewkungwal J, Singhasivanon P: Advantages of using voiced questionnaire and image capture application for data collection from a minority group in rural areas along the Thailand-Myanmar border. Inform Prim Care 2014;21:179-188.
15.
Wahi MM, Parks DV, Skeate RC, Goldin SB: Reducing errors from the electronic transcription of data collected on paper forms: a research data case study. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2008;15:386-389.
16.
Walther B, Hossin S, Townend J, Abernethy N, Parker D, Jeffries D: Comparison of electronic data capture (EDC) with the standard data capture method for clinical trial data. PLoS One 2011;6:e25348.
© 2016 S. Karger AG, Basel
2016
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.