The Impact of Single Versus Dual Data Entry on Accuracy of Relational Database Information

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the differences in entry errors associated with entry of prospective cohort data using a single versus a dual data entry system. Design: Cross-over trial Measurements: The database for the Canadian Intercollegiate Sport Injury Registry (CISIR) has, to date, used a dual data entry system. To test the differences in entry error, one season of injury and exposure (participation) data were entered for one sport from two participating institutions. A total of 5 data entry clerks were involved. Discrepancies between the final entries from both systems were flagged and checked against the original paper record. The number of instances where the dual entry system was correct but the single entry system was incorrect, and vice versa, were determined. Results: A total of 17,988 database fields were evaluated (15,509 text and 2,479 fixed response fields). There was a statistically significant difference in error where the dual entry system was correct but the single entry system was incorrect for 2 out of the 4 data entry modules. The percent accuracy using the single entry system was lower (99.35%) than that using the dual entry system (99.83%). Conclusions: Although the single entry system was statistically different from the dual entry system, the percent accuracy remained high and the errors did not cluster in one specific field. Given the doubling of entry costs with a dual entry system, it is recommended that a single entry system be used for the CISIR.