This study examines completion rate for a self-assessment survey designed to assess employees' digital skills levels in the workplace. The aim is to improve data quality by investigating completion of the survey. The study reviews the theoretical background related to self-assessment surveys and completion rate, and explores the influence of survey length and format in survey design on completion rate. The research design and data analysis are described in detail, with a focus on identifying factors that may influence completion rate. Results suggest that survey designers should consider using Likert scales to optimize completion rate and completion time. However, this study did not find a significant increase in completion rate as a result of motivation, which was claimed from the literature. The study concludes with implications for the design and implementation of self-assessment surveys in the workplace, including the importance of reducing length and complexity of survey items and questions.
DOCUMENT
A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey research was conducted to estimate honorary authorship prevalence in health sciences. We searched PubMed, Lens.org, and Dimensions.ai. until January 5 2023. Methodological quality was assessed and quantitative syntheses were conducted. Nineteen surveys were included and rated as having low methodological quality. We found a pooled prevalence of 26% [95% CI 21–31] (6 surveys, 2758 respondents) of researchers that perceived co-author(s) as honorary on the publication at issue (when they were not referred to any authorship criteria). That prevalence was 18% [95% CI 15–21] (11 surveys, 4272 respondents) when researchers were referred to Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) authorship criteria, and 51% [95% CI 47–56] (15 surveys, 5111 respondents) when researchers were asked to declare their co-author(s) contributions on the publication at issue (and these were then compared to ICMJE criteria). 10% of researchers [95% CI 9–12] (11 surveys, 3,663 respondents) reported being approached by others to include honorary author(s) on the publication at issue and 16% [95% CI 13–18] (2 surveys, 823 respondents) admitted adding (an) honorary author(s). Survey research consistently indicates that honorary authorship in the health sciences is highly prevalent, however the quality of the surveys’ methods and reporting needs improvement.
MULTIFILE
This study was motivated by a desire to help working-age individuals gain a better understanding of their daily nutritional intakes with a new self-reported dietary assessment method because an unhealthy eating behavior increases the risks of developing chronic diseases. In this study, we present the design and evaluation of NutriColoring, a food diary that leverages doodling on sketches to report and reflect on everyday diet in the working context. Through a 2-week field study involving 18 participants, the usefulness of NutriColoring in facilitating dietary assessment was tested by making comparisons with the typical bullet diary method. Our quantitative results showed that NutriColoring provided users with improved dietary assessment experience and intrinsic motivations, with significantly low task frustration and high enjoyment. Because of the freedom and playfulness in reporting intakes at work, the interview findings showed a high acceptance of employing NutriColoring at work. This article is concluded with a set of implications for the design and development of a Doodling toolkit to support healthy eating behaviors among office workers.
DOCUMENT