Abstract:Background: A population-level survey (PLS) is an essential and standard method used in public health research that supports the quantification of sociodemographic events, public health policy development, and intervention designs. Data collection mechanisms in PLS seem to be a significant determinant in avoiding mistakes. Using electronic devices such as smartphones and tablet computers improves the quality and cost-effectiveness of public health surveys. However, there is a lack of systematic evidence to show the potential impact of electronic data collection tools on data quality and cost reduction in interviewer-administered surveys compared with the standard paper-based data collection system. Objective: This systematic review aims to evaluate the impact of the interviewer-administered electronic data collection methods on data quality and cost reduction in PLS compared with traditional methods. Methods: We conducted a systematic search of MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, the Web of Science, EconLit, Cochrane CENTRAL, and CDSR to identify relevant studies from 2008 to 2018. We included randomized and nonrandomized studies that examined data quality and cost reduction outcomes, as well as usability, user experience, and usage parameters. In total, 2 independent authors screened the title and abstract, and extracted data from selected papers. A third author mediated any disagreements. The review authors used EndNote for deduplication and Rayyan for screening. Results: Our search produced 3817 papers. After deduplication, we screened 2533 papers, and 14 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. None of the studies were randomized controlled trials; most had a quasi-experimental design, for example, comparative experimental evaluation studies nested on other ongoing cross-sectional surveys. A total of 4 comparative evaluations, 2 pre-post intervention comparative evaluations, 2 retrospective comparative evaluations, and 4 one-arm noncomparative studies were included. Meta-analysis was not possible because of the heterogeneity in study designs, types, study settings, and level of outcome measurements. Individual paper synthesis showed that electronic data collection systems provided good quality data and delivered faster compared with paper-based data collection systems. Only 2 studies linked cost and data quality outcomes to describe the cost-effectiveness of electronic data collection systems. Field data collectors reported that an electronic data collection system was a feasible, acceptable, and preferable tool for their work. Onsite data error prevention, fast data submission, and easy-to-handle devices were the comparative advantages offered by electronic data collection systems. Challenges during implementation included technical difficulties, accidental data loss, device theft, security concerns, power surges, and internet connection problems. Conclusions: Although evidence exists of the comparative advantages of electronic data collection compared with paper-based methods, the included studies were not methodologically rigorous enough to combine. More rigorous studies are needed to compare paper and electronic data collection systems in public health surveys considering data quality, work efficiency, and cost reduction. International registered report identifier (irrid): RR2-10.2196/10678.

Minimum cost analysis of paper and pencil interview and computer assisted personal interview of Composite International Diagnostic Interview

Comparison of Mail and Meeting Forms in Evaluation of Delphi Study

Validation of the Chinese Version of the Questionnaire for Impulsive-Compulsive Disorders in Parkinson's Disease

Evaluating Performance of Local Case-Mix System by International Comparison: a Case Study in Beijing, China.

Community-based evaluation of the reliability and validity of Chinese version of Composite International Diagnostic Interview-3.0

Measuring Costs of Data Collection at Village Clinics by Village Doctors for a Syndromic Surveillance System-a Cross Sectional Survey from China

Data Quality and Cost-effectiveness Analyses of Electronic and Paper-Based Interviewer-Administered Public Health Surveys: Systematic Review

The China Mental Health Survey: II. Design and field procedures

Proxy Survey Cost Indicators in Interviewer-Administered Surveys: Are they Actually Correlated with Costs?

Cost-benefit and Discriminant Validity of a Stepwise Dementia Case-Finding Approach in an Asian Older Adult Community

Validity of Chinese Version of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview-3.0 in Psychiatric Settings.

Estimation of diagnostic performance of dementia screening tests: Mini-Mental State Examination, Mini-Cog, Clock Drawing test and Ascertain Dementia 8 questionnaire.

Cost accounting for diagnosis items based on virtual standardized clinical chemistry laboratory

Does sampling using random digit dialling really cost more than sampling from telephone directories: debunking the myths

A psychometric analysis of a short form of the Chinese version of the ISPCAN child abuse screening tools – Children’s home version (SC-ICAST-CH) using multidimensional item response theory

Evaluation of the Reliability and Validity of Chinese Version of the Mini.International Neuropsychiatric Interview in Patients with Mental Disorders

Developing and Validating a Tablet Version of an Illness Explanatory Model Interview for a Public Health Survey in Pune, India

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis in Performance Assessments: A Case Study of the Objective Structured Clinical Examination

Rapid Assessment and Sample Surveys: Trade-Offs in Precision and Cost

The cost investigation of information management in county and township level outpatient departments of immunization sites in Jiangxi province

From paper to pixels: A comparison of paper and computer formats in psychological assessment