Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 1583433

Bar coding--a functional tool in survey research.

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The aim was to assess the value of bar coding, together with developed microcomputer programs, as a tool to speed up mailing and handling of return responses of a survey where over 4000 adolescents received a mailed questionnaire. DESIGN: Bar codes were used for displaying the identification number of a questionnaire, as well as each response alternative and number of the question. These bar codes were read by a wand, a handhold scanner, connected to a microcomputer and the data were automatically entered into a computer data file. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Compared with previous similar surveys, the use of bar codes did not seem to affect a manner of responding. Bar coding saved human steps in handling of return responses, reduced an error rate, and helped to control the process of work. Bar coding is recommended as a new technical tool for preparations of future large scale surveys.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

M Siivola, A Rimpelä, S Karvonen, M Rimpelä. 1992. Bar coding--a functional tool in survey research.. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.46.2.162

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Evaluation of an intelligent tutoring system in pathology: effects of external representation on performance gains, metacognition, and acceptance.

OBJECTIVE: Determine effects of computer-based tutoring on diagnostic performance gains, meta-cognition, and acceptance using two different problem representations. Describe impact of tutoring on spectrum of diagnostic skills required for task performance. Identify key features of student-tutor interaction contributing to learning gains. DESIGN: Prospective, between-subjects study, controlled for participant level of training. Resident physicians in two academic pathology programs spent four hours using one of two interfaces which differed mainly in external problem representation. The case-focused representation provided an open-learning environment in which students were free to explore evidence-hypothesis relationships within a case, but could not visualize the entire diagnostic space. The knowledge-focused representation provided an interactive representation of the entire diagnostic space, which more tightly constrained student actions. MEASUREMENTS: Metrics included results of pretest, post-test and retention-test for multiple choice and case diagnosis tests, ratios of performance to student reported certainty, results of participant survey, learning curves, and interaction behaviors during tutoring. RESULTS: Students had highly significant learning gains after one tutoring session. Learning was retained at one week. There were no differences between the two interfaces in learning gains on post-test or retention test. Only students in the knowledge-focused interface exhibited significant metacognitive gains from pretest to post-test and pretest to retention test. Students rated the knowledge-focused interface significantly higher than the case-focused interface. CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive tutoring is associated with improved diagnostic performance in a complex medical domain. The effect is retained at one-week post-training. Knowledge-focused external problem representation shows an advantage over case-focused representation for metacognitive effects and user acceptance.

Attitude to Computers↗