Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText. Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>

A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

10.1177/1049732320935835 http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1177/1049732320935835 32667257!ä!32667257 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 209.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 209.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 209.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 209.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 209.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 209.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 209.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 209.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 243.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534       Qual+Health+Res 2020 ; 30 (13): 2092-2102 Nephropedia Template TP {{tp|p=32667257|t=2020. Face-to-Face Compared With Online Collected Accounts of Health and Illness Experiences: A Scoping Review |pdf=|usr=}}{{32667257}} gab.com Text Face-to-Face Compared With Online Collected Accounts of Health and Illness Experiences: A Scoping Review JO: Qual Health Res http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=32667257 #FOAvip Advocates of online alternatives to face-to-face interviewing suggest online approaches save money and time, whereas others have raised concerns about the quality and content of the resulting data. These issues affect researchers designing and costing their studies and application reviewers and research funders. We conducted a scoping review of English language articles describing the range of online alternative approaches. Furthermore, we systematically identified studies directly comparing online alternatives with face-to-face approaches. Synthesis of these 11 articles (565 participants) suggests that online alternatives should not be viewed as a straightforward replacement for face-to-face, a particularly important finding given the rapid communication changes occurring in the COVID-19 pandemic. When applied with consideration of the evolving evidence on their strengths and weaknesses, online methods may increase the likelihood of obtaining the desired sample, but responses are shorter, less contextual information is obtained, and relational satisfaction and consensus development are lower. Twit Text FOAVip Face-to-Face Compared With Online Collected Accounts of Health and Illness Experiences: A Scoping Review ????Qual Health Res http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=32667257 #FOAvip Twit Text # Free Paper on # # # # # LINK http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=32667257 #FOAvip English Wikipedia <ref>{{Cite pmid|32667257}}</ref> Face-to-Face Compared With Online Collected Accounts of Health and Illness Experiences: A Scoping Review #MMPMID32667257 Davies L; LeClair KL; Bagley P; Blunt H; Hinton L; Ryan S; Ziebland S Qual Health Res 2020[Nov]; 30 (13): 2092-2102 PMID32667257show ga Advocates of online alternatives to face-to-face interviewing suggest online approaches save money and time, whereas others have raised concerns about the quality and content of the resulting data. These issues affect researchers designing and costing their studies and application reviewers and research funders. We conducted a scoping review of English language articles describing the range of online alternative approaches. Furthermore, we systematically identified studies directly comparing online alternatives with face-to-face approaches. Synthesis of these 11 articles (565 participants) suggests that online alternatives should not be viewed as a straightforward replacement for face-to-face, a particularly important finding given the rapid communication changes occurring in the COVID-19 pandemic. When applied with consideration of the evolving evidence on their strengths and weaknesses, online methods may increase the likelihood of obtaining the desired sample, but responses are shorter, less contextual information is obtained, and relational satisfaction and consensus development are lower. |*Internet[MESH] |*Qualitative Research[MESH] |Betacoronavirus[MESH] |COVID-19[MESH] |Communication[MESH] |Coronavirus Infections/*epidemiology[MESH] |Data Accuracy[MESH] |Data Collection/*methods[MESH] |Focus Groups[MESH] |Humans[MESH] |Interviews as Topic/*methods[MESH] |Pandemics[MESH] |Pneumonia, Viral/*epidemiology[MESH] |Research Design[MESH]Face-to-Face Compared With Online Collected Accounts of Health and Ill(epmc).pdf DeepDyve Pubget Overpricing