Electronic versus Paper-Based Data Collection for Conducting Health-Care Research: A Cost-Comparison Analysis

ABSTRACT

Background: Containing expenditure and efficient resource use is essential to limit the increasing costs of health research. Electronic data collection (EDC) is thought to reduce the costs compared to paper-based data collection (PDC). Objectives: As economic evidence in this area is scanty, especially in low- and middle-income countries, the objectives of the study are to perform an economic evaluation and compare the cost between EDC and PDC. Methods: A cost-comparison study was conducted to compare between EDC and PDC from the institutional perspective for the year 2018, based on a community?based survey. Step?down cost accounting was adopted with a bottom?up approach for cost estimation. Total and unit costs were estimated with the base case comparison between EDC and PDC while using SPSS software (e?SPSS and p?SPSS, respectively). We conducted scenario analyses based on the usage of different software, R and STATA for both EDC and PDC (e-R, p-R, e-STATA, and p-STATA, respectively). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was performed to examine the robustness of the observed results. Results: In the base-case analysis, total costs of EDC and PDC were ?72,617 ($1060.9) and 87,717 ($1281.5), respectively, with estimated cost reduction of ?15,100 ($220.6). In other scenarios, the estimated cost reduction for e?R, e-STATA, p-R, p-STATA was ??274 ($4.0), 98 ($1.4), 14826 ($216.6), and 15,002 ($219.2), respectively, when compared to EDC?SPSS. On one-way and PSA, the results of the cost-comparison analysis were robust. Conclusion: EDC minimizes institutional cost for conducting health research. This finding will help researchers in efficiently planning for the budget for their research.