Experimental study of two methods of data collection by questionnaire

Area of Science:

• Dental Public Health
• Epidemiology
• Health Services Research

Background:

• Accurate data collection on caries preventive services is crucial for dental public health.
• Traditional methods may be resource-intensive, prompting exploration of alternative data collection strategies.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare the accuracy of two data collection methods for caries preventive services in general dental practice.
• To evaluate the response rates and data validity of a registration method versus an estimation method.

Main Methods:

• A national sample of 479 Norwegian dentists was randomly allocated into two groups.
• Group GR (n=287) used patient-specific registration forms for one day.
• Group GE (n=192) provided general estimates of services and time spent on caries prevention.

Main Results:

• Response rates were similar between the estimation (51.7%) and registration (46.2%) groups.
• The estimation method significantly overestimated the frequency of caries preventive procedures (P < 0.005).
• Despite being labor-saving, the estimation method's data lacked accuracy.

Conclusions:

• The estimation method is not recommended for collecting data on caries prevention in dental settings due to overestimation.
• Direct patient registration, while more demanding, provides more reliable data on preventive service utilization.
• Future research should focus on validated and efficient data collection tools for dental practice.