Abstract
BackgroundThrough a nationally representative household survey in Afghanistan, we conducted an operational study in two relatively secure provinces comparing effectiveness of computer-aided personal interviewing (CAPI) with paper-and-pencil interviewing (PAPI).MethodsIn Panjshir and Parwan provinces, household survey data were collected using paper questionnaires in 15 clusters, and OpenDataKit (ODK) software on electronic tablets in 15 other clusters. Added value was evaluated from three perspectives: efficient implementation, data quality, and acceptability. Efficiency was measured through financial expenditures and time stamped data. Data quality was measured by examining completeness. Acceptability was studied through focus group discussions with survey staff.ResultsSurvey costs were 68% more expensive in CAPI clusters compared to PAPI clusters, due primarily to the upfront one-time investment for survey programming. Enumerators spent significantly less time administering surveys in CAPI cluster households (248 min survey time) compared to PAPI (289 min), for an average savings of 41 min per household (95% CI 25–55). CAPI offered a savings of 87 days for data management over PAPI.Among 49 tracer variables (meaning responses were required from all respondents), small differences were observed between PAPI and CAPI. 2.2% of the cleaned dataset’s tracer data points were missing in CAPI surveys (1216/ 56,073 data points), compared to 3.2% in PAPI surveys (1953/ 60,675 data points). In pre-cleaned datasets, 3.9% of tracer data points were missing in CAPI surveys (2151/ 55,092 data points) compared to 3.2% in PAPI surveys (1924/ 60,113 data points).Enumerators from Panjsher and Parwan preferred CAPI over PAPI due to time savings, user-friendliness, improved data security, and less conspicuity when traveling; however approximately half of enumerators trained from all 34 provinces reported feeling unsafe due to Taliban presence. Community and household respondent skepticism could be resolved by enumerator reassurance. Enumerators shared that in the future, they prefer collecting data using CAPI when possible.ConclusionsCAPI offers clear gains in efficiency over PAPI for data collection and management time, although costs are relatively comparable even without the programming investment. However, serious field staff concerns around Taliban threats and general insecurity mean that CAPI should only be conducted in relatively secure areas.
Highlights
Through a nationally representative household survey in Afghanistan, we conducted an operational study in two relatively secure provinces comparing effectiveness of computer-aided personal interviewing (CAPI) with paper-and-pencil interviewing (PAPI)
Enumerators from Panjsher and Parwan preferred CAPI over PAPI due to time savings, user-friendliness, improved data security, and less conspicuity when traveling; approximately half of enumerators trained from all 34 provinces reported feeling unsafe due to Taliban presence
Serious field staff concerns around Taliban threats and general insecurity mean that CAPI should only be conducted in relatively secure areas
Summary
Through a nationally representative household survey in Afghanistan, we conducted an operational study in two relatively secure provinces comparing effectiveness of computer-aided personal interviewing (CAPI) with paper-and-pencil interviewing (PAPI). Mergenthaler et al Emerging Themes in Epidemiology (2021) 18:16 around paper storage, and transportation and entry into the final electronic systems. This has consequences in terms of time, human and financial resources, and seriously tests the capacity of research groups implementing the survey. From the standpoint of public health research, and to understand factors affecting the uptake of CAPI in insecure settings, we evaluated the differences in time and cost efficiency of training, procurement and data collection; data quality; and user perceptions of these two methods. The full report of the survey is available online (‘[3]’, no date), while the aim of the study presented in this manuscript was to assess potential added value of CAPI over PAPI from three perspectives: efficiency of implementation, data quality, and user and respondent acceptability
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
