References
- Haigh R, Tennant A, Biering-Sorensen F, et al. The use of outcome measures in physical medicine and rehabilitation within Europe. J Rehabil Med. 2001;33:273–278.
- Abernethy AP, Herndon JE 2nd, Wheeler JL, et al. Improving health care efficiency and quality using tablet personal computers to collect research-quality, patient-reported data. Health Serv Res. 2008;43:1975–1991.
- Ekman A, Litton JE. New times, new needs; e-epidemiology. Eur J Epidemiol. 2007;22:285–292.
- Touvier M, Mejean C, Kesse-Guyot E, et al. Comparison between web-based and paper versions of a self-administered anthropometric questionnaire. Eur J Epidemiol. 2010;25:287–296.
- Smith SK, Rowe K, Abernethy AP. Use of an electronic patient-reported outcome measurement system to improve distress management in oncology. Palliat Support Care. 2014;12:69–73.
- Basch E, Goldfarb S. Electronic patient-reported outcomes for collecting sensitive information from patients. J Support Oncol. 2009;7:98–99.
- Coons SJ, Eremenco S, Lundy JJ, et al. Capturing Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) data electronically: the past, present, and promise of ePRO measurement in clinical trials. Patient. 2015;8:301–309.
- Gwaltney CJ, Shields AL, Shiffman S. Equivalence of electronic and paper-and-pencil administration of patient-reported outcome measures: a meta-analytic review. Value Health. 2008;11:322–333.
- Ganser AL, Raymond SA, Pearson JD. Data quality and power in clinical trials: a comparison of ePRO and paper in a randomized trial. In: ePRO: electronic solutions for patient-reported data; 2010, Gower: Surray. p. 49–78.
- Ekman A, Dickman PW, Klint A, et al. Feasibility of using web-based questionnaires in large population-based epidemiological studies. Eur J Epidemiol. 2006;21:103–111.
- Wahi MM, Parks DV, Skeate RC, et al. Reducing errors from the electronic transcription of data collected on paper forms: a research data case study. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2008;15:386–389.
- Barentsz MW, Wessels H, van Diest PJ, et al. Tablet, web-based, or paper questionnaires for measuring anxiety in patients suspected of breast cancer: patients' preferences and quality of collected data. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16:e239.
- Kongsved SM, Basnov M, Holm-Christensen K, et al. Response rate and completeness of questionnaires: a randomized study of Internet versus paper-and-pencil versions. J Med Internet Res. 2007;9:e25.
- Hohwu L, Lyshol H, Gissler M, et al. Web-based versus traditional paper questionnaires: a mixed-mode survey with a Nordic perspective. J Med Internet Res. 2013;15:e173.
- Leece P, Bhandari M, Sprague S, et al. Internet versus mailed questionnaires: a controlled comparison (2). J Med Internet Res 2004;6:e39.
- Lorentzen K. Bruk av IKT i husholdningene. Statistics Norway; 2015 [cited 2015 Nov 27]. Available from: http://www.ssb.no/teknologi-og-innovasjon/statistikker/ikthus/aar.
- Hibbard JH, Stockard J, Mahoney ER, et al. Development of the Patient Activation Measure (PAM): conceptualizing and measuring activation in patients and consumers. Health Serv Res. 2004;39:1005–1026.
- Hofer S, Lim L, Guyatt G, et al. The MacNew Heart Disease health-related quality of life instrument: a summary. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2004;2:3.
- Chalder T, Berelowitz G, Pawlikowska T, et al. Development of a fatigue scale. J Psychosom Res. 1993;37:147–153.
- Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993;85:365–376.
- Zigmond AS, Snaith RP. The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1983;67:361–370.
- Kendler KS, Myers J, Potter J, et al. A web-based study of personality, psychopathology and substance use in twin, other relative and relationship pairs. Twin Res Hum Genet. 2009;12:137–141.
- Bowling A. Mode of questionnaire administration can have serious effects on data quality. J Public Health. 2005;27:281–291.
- Graham AL, Papandonatos GD. Reliability of internet- versus telephone-administered questionnaires in a diverse sample of smokers. J Med Internet Res. 2008;10:e8.
- Horevoorts NJ, Vissers PA, Mols F, et al. Response rates for patient-reported outcomes using web-based versus paper questionnaires: comparison of two invitational methods in older colorectal cancer patients. J Med Internet Res. 2015;17:e111.
- Fricker RD, Schonlau M. Advantages and disadvantages of Internet research surveys: evidence from the literature. Field Methods. 2002;14:347–367.
- van Gelder MM, Bretveld RW, Roeleveld N. Web-based questionnaires: the future in epidemiology? Am J Epidemiol. 2010;172:1292–1298.
- Wilson AS, Kitas GD, Carruthers DM, et al. Computerized information-gathering in specialist rheumatology clinics: an initial evaluation of an electronic version of the Short Form 36. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2002;41:268–273.
- Velikova G, Wright EP, Smith AB, et al. Automated collection of quality-of-life data: a comparison of paper and computer touch-screen questionnaires. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:998–1007.
- Salaffi F, Gasparini S, Grassi W. The use of computer touch-screen technology for the collection of patient-reported outcome data in rheumatoid arthritis: comparison with standardized paper questionnaires. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2009;27:459–468.
- Lygidakis C, Rigon S, Cambiaso S, et al. A web-based versus paper questionnaire on alcohol and tobacco in adolescents. Telemed J E Health. 2010;16:925–930.