{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01689933872152829, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005143277002204262, 'mean_word_length': 5.135135135135135, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
User Preferences for Computer Administration of Quality of Life Instruments*

Introduction. While most health-related quality of life instruments are administered through paper and pencil self report or via in-person or telephone interviewer, the use of electronic data capture through a computer touch screen has unique advantages if this mode of administration is acceptable to patients and researchers. Methods. A total of 134 patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease were enrolled in an age stratified cross-over design study in which they were asked to complete two quality of life instruments using paper and pencil and computer touch screen administration. Responses on preference and ease of use were solicited from both patients and research coordinators. Results. Over 50% of patients found the computer to be more comfortable, faster, easier to use, and the method they would prefer to use. The majority (82%) of the research coordinators would prefer to use the computer mode of administration in a clinical trial and they thought that the computer was easier for patients to use. Conclusions. The computer touch screen administration of quality of life instruments is a viable alternative for use in clinical trials. The two key user groups of patients and research coordinators strongly preferred the computer to traditional paper and pencil.