AJPH
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

American Journal of Public Health, Vol. 67, Issue 7 640-644, Copyright © 1977 by American Public Health Association

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fisher, L A
Right arrow Articles by Slack, W V
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Fisher, L A
Right arrow Articles by Slack, W V
Collection of a clean voided urine specimen: a comparison among spoken, written, and computer-based instructions.

L A Fisher, T S Johnson, D Porter, H L Bleich and W V Slack

In an effort to compare different methods of instructing patients, 99 women 18-25 years of age were given computer, spoken, weitten, or no instructions for the collection of a clean voided urine specimen. The group who received computer instructions was the most uniform in its performance (P less than 0.002, F-test) and reported the fewest procedural problems (P less than 0.02, Fisher test). In addition, this group had fewer contaminating bacteria than the group who received written instructions (P less than 0.03 , Mann-Whitney test). The group who received no instructions had more bacteria (P less than 0.0001, Mann-Whitney test) than any of the other groups. The effectiveness of the computer instruction was probably related to numerous attributes, including the individualized quality of the dialogue, self-pacing, self-testing, and privacy.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 JAMAHome page
W. V. Slack
A 67-Year-Old Man Who e-Mails His Physician
JAMA, November 10, 2004; 292(18): 2255 - 2261.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc.Home page
J. Michael Fitzmaurice, K. Adams, and J. M. Eisenberg
Three Decades of Research on Computer Applications in Health Care: Medical Informatics Support at the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc., March 1, 2002; 9(2): 144 - 160.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc.Home page
D. Lewis
Computer-based Approaches to Patient Education: A Review of the Literature
J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc., July 1, 1999; 6(4): 272 - 282.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Health Educ BehavHome page
D. M. N. Paperny
Computerized Health Assessment and Education for Adolescent HIV and STD Prevention in Health Care Settings and Schools
Health Educ Behav, February 1, 1997; 24(1): 54 - 70.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 West J Nurs ResHome page
D. R. Brogan
Choosing an Appropriate Statistical Test of Significance for a Nursing Research Hypothesis or Question
West J Nurs Res, October 1, 1981; 3(4): 337 - 352.


Home page
 The Journal of Early AdolescenceHome page
K. Bosworth, B. Chewning, T. Day, R. Hawkins, and D. Gustafson
Barny a Computer Based Health Information System for Adolescents
The Journal of Early Adolescence, August 1, 1981; 1(3): 315 - 321.



HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1977 by the American Public Health Association