Title |
Comparison of Electronic Data Capture (EDC) with the Standard Data Capture Method for Clinical Trial Data
|
---|---|
Published in |
PLOS ONE, September 2011
|
DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0025348 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Brigitte Walther, Safayet Hossin, John Townend, Neil Abernethy, David Parker, David Jeffries |
Abstract |
Traditionally, clinical research studies rely on collecting data with case report forms, which are subsequently entered into a database to create electronic records. Although well established, this method is time-consuming and error-prone. This study compares four electronic data capture (EDC) methods with the conventional approach with respect to duration of data capture and accuracy. It was performed in a West African setting, where clinical trials involve data collection from urban, rural and often remote locations. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 3 | 50% |
Ireland | 1 | 17% |
Canada | 1 | 17% |
Unknown | 1 | 17% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 17% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 190 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 4 | 2% |
Belgium | 2 | 1% |
Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
Brazil | 1 | <1% |
Canada | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 179 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Researcher | 47 | 25% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 29 | 15% |
Student > Master | 28 | 15% |
Student > Postgraduate | 17 | 9% |
Student > Bachelor | 12 | 6% |
Other | 31 | 16% |
Unknown | 26 | 14% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 58 | 31% |
Computer Science | 21 | 11% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 16 | 8% |
Social Sciences | 11 | 6% |
Psychology | 9 | 5% |
Other | 47 | 25% |
Unknown | 28 | 15% |