Advertisement

International Journal of Public Health

, Volume 57, Issue 6, pp 959–961 | Cite as

Testing Skype as an interview method in epidemiologic research: response and feasibility

  • Tobias WeinmannEmail author
  • Silke Thomas
  • Susanne Brilmayer
  • Sabine Heinrich
  • Katja Radon
Hints & Kinks

Abstract

Introduction

Despite its popularity, Skype has not been tested as a tool for epidemiologic research. We examined its feasibility in Germany.

Methods

A population-based sample of young adults was randomly invited to a Skype (n = 150) or a phone interview (n = 150). Response and duration of interviews were analysed to evaluate the feasibility of Skype interviews.

Results

Response was low and, with 10 % (95 % CI 5–15 %), even worse among Skype candidates, compared to 22 % (15–28 %) in the phone group. A third of the Skype group asked for being interviewed by phone. Median duration was 34.0 minutes for Skype interviews and 37.0 minutes for phone interviews.

Conclusions

Skype is not yet a feasible tool for data collection in Germany.

Keywords

Epidemiologic methods Data collection Survey methodology Communication Videoconferencing 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors are very grateful to all our MOBI-KIDS partners, especially to Elisabeth Cardis, Siegal Sadetzki, Revital Bruchim, Chelsea Eastman, Laurel Kincl, Martine Vrijheid, Sandra Pla, Maria Saarela, Michael Kundi, Hans Kromhout, Roel Vermeulen, Franco Merletti, Milena Maule, Malcolm Sim, Joe Wiart, and Myron Maslanyi for their dedication to the finalisation of the study questionnaire. We also express our appreciation to Verena Eichel for her commitment to the planning of the pilot study and we thank Carolina Bürger, Carina Dehner, Sebastian Haneder, and Alicja Rogalinska for their support in the fieldwork. Many thanks are also given to Barbara Hartmann for her linguistic adviceThe MOBI-KIDS study is funded by the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under Grant Agreement 226873- the MOBI-KIDS Project.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical standard

The study complies with the current laws of the country in which it was performed.

References

  1. Bexelius C, Merk H, Sandin S et al (2009) SMS versus telephone interviews for epidemiological data collection: feasibility study estimating influenza vaccination coverage in the Swedish population. Eur J Epidemiol 24(2):73–81PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Davies J, McCrae BP, Frank J et al (2000) Identifying male college students’ perceived health needs, barriers to seeking help, and recommendations to help men adopt healthier lifestyles. J Am Coll Health 48(6):259–267PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. De Cicco L, Mascolo S, Palmisano V (2011) Skype Video congestion control: an experimental investigation. Computer Netw 55:558–571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Donovan RJ, Holman CD, Corti B, Jalleh G (1997) Face-to-face household interviews versus telephone interviews for health surveys. Aust N Z J Public Health 21(2):134–140PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Edwards PJ, Roberts I, Clarke MJ et al (2009) Methods to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3:MR000008Google Scholar
  6. Ekman A, Litton JE (2007) New times; new needs; e-epidemiology. Eur J Epidemiol 22(5):285–292PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Galea S, Tracy M (2007) Participation rates in epidemiologic studies. Ann Epidemiol 17(9):643–653PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Heinrich S, Peters A, Kellberger J et al (2011) Study on occupational allergy risks (SOLAR II) in Germany: design and methods. BMC Public Health 11:298PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Jones L, Saksvig BI, Grieser M et al (2011) Recruiting adolescent girls into a follow-up study: benefits of using a social networking website. Contemp Clin Trials 33(2):268–272PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ramo DE, Hall SM, Prochaska JJ (2010) Reaching young adult smokers through the internet: comparison of three recruitment mechanisms. Nicotine Tob Res 12(7):768–775PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Rhodes SD, Bowie DA, Hergenrather KC (2003) Collecting behavioural data using the world wide web: considerations for researchers. J Epidemiol Community Health 57(1):68–73PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Russell CW, Boggs DA, Palmer JR et al (2011) Use of a web-based questionnaire in the Black Women’s Health Study. Am J Epidemiol 172(11):1286–1291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Sedgwick M, Spiers J (2009) The use of videoconferencing as a medium for the qualitative interview. Int J Qual Meth 8(1):1–11Google Scholar
  14. Touvier M, Mejean C, Kesse-Guyot E et al (2010) Comparison between web-based and paper versions of a self-administered anthropometric questionnaire. Eur J Epidemiol 25(5):287–296PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Vergnaud AC, Touvier M, Mejean C et al (2011) Agreement between web-based and paper versions of a socio-demographic questionnaire in the NutriNet-Sante study. Int J Public Health 56(4):407–417PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Swiss School of Public Health 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tobias Weinmann
    • 1
    Email author
  • Silke Thomas
    • 2
  • Susanne Brilmayer
    • 1
  • Sabine Heinrich
    • 1
  • Katja Radon
    • 1
  1. 1.Occupational and Environmental Epidemiology and NetTeaching Unit, Institute and Outpatient Clinic for Occupational, Social and Environmental MedicineUniversity Hospital of Munich (LMU)MunichGermany
  2. 2.Medical Advisory Service of Social Health InsuranceEssenGermany

Personalised recommendations