Accepted for/Published in: JMIR mHealth and uHealth
Date Submitted: Jun 28, 2019
Date Accepted: Jun 13, 2020
Date Submitted to PubMed: Aug 8, 2020
Comparing a mobile phone automated system with a paper and email data collection system: a sub-study within a randomised controlled trial
ABSTRACT
Background:
Standard data collection methods using paper and email methods are increasingly being replaced by data collection using mobile phone technology, with limited evidence evaluating the impact of m-technology as part of a research management system on data collection and health outcomes.
Objective:
The aim of this study was to compare a web-based mobile phone application system (MPAS) with a standard delivery and data collection system (SDS) combining paper and electronic data collection in a cohort of breastfeeding women.
Methods:
We conducted a sub-study of a randomised controlled trial in Sydney, Australia which included women with uncomplicated term births who intended to breastfeed. Women were recruited within 72 hours of birth. A quasi-randomised number of women were recruited using the SDS, and the remainder using the MPAS. Outcomes assessed included effectiveness of data collection, impact on study outcomes, response rate, acceptability and cost analysis between the MPAS and SDS methods.
Results:
Women were recruited between April 2015 and December 2016. Analysis included 555 women: 471 using the MPAS and 84 the SDS. There were no differences in clinical outcomes between the two groups. Compared to the SDS group, the MPAS participants showed an increased rate of treatment compliance (70% vs 56%; P<0.001); an increased response rate (56% vs 37%; P <0.001); and a higher proportion of women recommended the MPAS for future use (95% vs 64%; P<0.001). Cost analysis between the two groups were comparable.
Conclusions:
A mobile phone application system is an effective and acceptable method for improving the overall management, treatment compliance and methodological quality of clinical research to ensure validity and reliability of findings. Clinical Trial: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12615000923561
Citation
Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.
Copyright
© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.