BACKGROUND: The proliferation of electronic information delivery systems has led to increasing use of e-mail as a rapid method of gathering information. Little research has been conducted on the use of e-mail for collecting curriculum evaluations. PURPOSE: To compare e-mailed and mailed educational evaluations for 4th-year medical students. METHODS: Curriculum evaluations were sent to 4th-year medical students who were randomly assigned to receive the survey either by mail or e-mail. RESULTS: Mailed evaluations yielded a higher return rate, fewer number of students omitting items, and shorter responses to an open-ended question than evaluations completed via e-mail. CONCLUSIONS: Although the findings have limited generalizability because of low response rates and small sample sizes, the results suggest caution when using e-mail to collect curriculum evaluations from 4th-year medical students.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The proliferation of electronic information delivery systems has led to increasing use of e-mail as a rapid method of gathering information. Little research has been conducted on the use of e-mail for collecting curriculum evaluations. PURPOSE: To compare e-mailed and mailed educational evaluations for 4th-year medical students. METHODS: Curriculum evaluations were sent to 4th-year medical students who were randomly assigned to receive the survey either by mail or e-mail. RESULTS: Mailed evaluations yielded a higher return rate, fewer number of students omitting items, and shorter responses to an open-ended question than evaluations completed via e-mail. CONCLUSIONS: Although the findings have limited generalizability because of low response rates and small sample sizes, the results suggest caution when using e-mail to collect curriculum evaluations from 4th-year medical students.
Authors: Melissa N Laska; Nicole A VanKim; Darin J Erickson; Katherine Lust; Marla E Eisenberg; B R Simon Rosser Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2015-01 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Julia M Przedworski; Nicole A VanKim; Marla E Eisenberg; Donna D McAlpine; Katherine A Lust; Melissa N Laska Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2015-05-18 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Michael P Anastario; Hector P Rodriguez; Patricia M Gallagher; Paul D Cleary; Dale Shaller; William H Rogers; Karen Bogen; Dana Gelb Safran Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Maureen A Curran; Michelle Black; Colin A Depp; Alana Iglewicz; Jennifer Reichstadt; Lawrence Palinkas; Dilip V Jeste Journal: Acad Psychiatry Date: 2014-07-31
Authors: Ceara Tess Cunningham; Hude Quan; Brenda Hemmelgarn; Tom Noseworthy; Cynthia A Beck; Elijah Dixon; Susan Samuel; William A Ghali; Lindsay L Sykes; Nathalie Jetté Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2015-04-09 Impact factor: 4.615
Authors: Sissel Marie Kongsved; Maja Basnov; Kurt Holm-Christensen; Niels Henrik Hjollund Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2007-09-30 Impact factor: 5.428