Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: Journal of Medical Internet Research

Date Submitted: Aug 1, 2022
Date Accepted: Dec 19, 2022
Date Submitted to PubMed: Dec 19, 2022

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

The Current Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices of the Neglected Methodology of Web-Based Questionnaires Among Chinese Health Workers: Web-Based Questionnaire Study

Fang H, Lv Y, Chen L, Zhang X, Hu Y

The Current Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices of the Neglected Methodology of Web-Based Questionnaires Among Chinese Health Workers: Web-Based Questionnaire Study

J Med Internet Res 2023;25:e41591

DOI: 10.2196/41591

PMID: 36533302

PMCID: 9919466

The neglected methodology of web-based questionnaires: the current knowledge, attitudes, and practices among Chinese health workers

  • Heping Fang; 
  • Yuxin Lv; 
  • Lin Chen; 
  • Xuan Zhang; 
  • Yan Hu

ABSTRACT

Background:

Web-based questionnaire (WBQ) surveys are popular, but few researchers have reflected on or received training on them, making the research quality uneven and unsatisfactory. Education and training on WBQ methodology is urgent, but the current knowledge, attitude, and practices (KAP) of its methodology remain unknown.

Objective:

We investigated the KAP of WBQ methodology among Chinese health workers for the first time, to provide a basis for better targeted training in the future.

Methods:

We developed a structured web-based questionnaire based on the recommendations and knowledge of WBQ methodology, and investigated 458 health workers from June 7 to July 6, 2022. A total of 381 valid questionnaires were analyzed after data processing. We described the data statistically, and defined 50% and 75% as "qualified" and "satisfactory" in knowledge and practice topics, respectively.

Results:

The participants were mainly female (90.6%) and aged 37 (IQR 11) years old. A total of 56.2% of participants had used WBQs, mostly more than 2 times (88.3%), but only 43.9% had ever received methodological training. A total of 62.1% of users believed that WBQs were practical, but 58.9% had doubts about the reliability of the results. In addition, 88.8% of users believed training was necessary. In the knowledge and practice topics, all topics on knowledge did not reach a satisfactory level, especially “detection of duplicate respondents” (39.7%), and “guidelines for results reporting” (48.6%) did not reach a qualified level. Furthermore, other topics on practice did not reach a qualified level, including “ethics committee review” (32.7%), “conduct pretests” (42.1%), “response inducement measures” (31.3%), and “disposal of cloud data after survey” (30.8%).

Conclusions:

We found that health workers seriously underestimated and neglected the importance of the WBQ methodology, which may be an important reason for the reduced research quality. Medical educators need to strengthen methodological training on WBQs and track the latest research to keep up with its progress.


 Citation

Please cite as:

Fang H, Lv Y, Chen L, Zhang X, Hu Y

The Current Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices of the Neglected Methodology of Web-Based Questionnaires Among Chinese Health Workers: Web-Based Questionnaire Study

J Med Internet Res 2023;25:e41591

DOI: 10.2196/41591

PMID: 36533302

PMCID: 9919466

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© 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.