MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2611775094 · doi:10.2196/resprot.7534

Evaluation of Mechanisms to Improve Performance of Mobile Phone Surveys in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Research Protocol

2017· article· en· W2611775094 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSurvey Methodology and Nonresponse
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIncentiveMobile phoneAttritionPhoneSampling frameData collectionMedicineRandom digit dialingSurvey methodologyEnvironmental healthComputer sciencePopulationTelecommunicationsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mobile phone ownership and access have increased rapidly across low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) within the last decade. Concomitantly, LMICs are experiencing demographic and epidemiologic transitions, where non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are increasingly becoming leading causes of morbidity and mortality. Mobile phone surveys could aid data collection for prevention and control of these NCDs but limited evidence of their feasibility exists. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this paper is to describe a series of sub-studies aimed at optimizing the delivery of interactive voice response (IVR) and computer-assisted telephone interviews (CATI) for NCD risk factor data collection in LMICs. These sub-studies are designed to assess the effect of factors such as airtime incentive timing, amount, and structure, survey introduction characteristics, different sampling frames, and survey modality on key survey metrics, such as survey response, completion, and attrition rates. METHODS: In a series of sub-studies, participants will be randomly assigned to receive different airtime incentive amounts (eg, 10 minutes of airtime versus 20 minutes of airtime), different incentive delivery timings (airtime delivered before survey begins versus delivery upon completion of survey), different survey introductions (informational versus motivational), different narrative voices (male versus female), and different sampling frames (random digit dialing versus mobile network operator-provided numbers) to examine which study arms will yield the highest response and completion rates. Furthermore, response and completion rates and the inter-modal reliability of the IVR and CATI delivery methods will be compared. RESULTS: Research activities are expected to be completed in Bangladesh, Tanzania, and Uganda in 2017. CONCLUSIONS: This is one of the first studies to examine the feasibility of using IVR and CATI for systematic collection of NCD risk factor information in LMICs. Our findings will inform the future design and implementation of mobile phone surveys in LMICs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.584
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.045
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.539
Threshold uncertainty score0.963

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.5840.045
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.641
GPT teacher head0.667
Teacher spread0.025 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it