Accuracy and acceptability of eHealth data collection for an early intensive behavioral intervention program
eHealth data entry is as accurate as paper for EIBI, but staff still like paper—so add performance management before you switch.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Pankewich et al. (2022) asked staff to record DTT and behavior data two ways at the same time. One copy went on paper. One copy went into an eHealth app.
The team then compared the two sets to see if the numbers matched. Staff also filled out a short survey on which method they liked.
What they found
The digital and paper numbers were almost identical. Accuracy was not the problem.
Yet most staff still preferred pen-and-paper. They said the app felt slower and less natural.
How this fits with other research
Bamise et al. (2026) show that computer tools can train staff well. Their Nigerian learners hit high FA fidelity after only online modules. The tech works when the task is learning.
Koegel et al. (2014) warn that staff need both a clear target and daily feedback. Without those, even good tools fade. The new study did not add extra feedback, so low buy-in is not a shock.
Together the three papers say: tech can be accurate and can train, but you still have to manage the people using it.
Why it matters
You can swap paper for an app without losing data quality. The hurdle is social validity. Run a short pilot, give staff a daily goal, and add quick feedback like L et al. did. Praise correct entries and share the time saved. Once performance meets the goal, let the team vote on keeping the app. Accuracy is ready; buy-in is the next target.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Pick one client, run paper and app side-by-side for one day, give the tech a daily accuracy goal plus on-the-spot praise, and ask staff which felt smoother at dismissal.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
AbstractEarly intensive behavioral intervention (EIBI) is a treatment designed to increase adaptive behavior and decrease maladaptive behaviors for children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). EIBI service providers typically collect data using pen‐and‐paper. Participants were four service providers employed at a large community‐based EIBI program. Differences in accuracy between collecting discrete‐trial‐teaching (DTT) data and challenging behavior data using pen‐and‐paper and an eHealth electronic data collection (EDC) application were assessed. The social validity of both methods of data collection was also examined. Pen‐and‐paper and EDC were equally accurate, but participants preferred using pen‐and‐paper. Our accuracy findings agreed with previous comparisons of EDC and pen‐and‐paper. Both methods of data collection are viable for an EIBI program; however, social validity considerations will determine the ease of EIBI programs transitioning to using an eHealth tool for data collection.
Behavioral Interventions, 2022 · doi:10.1002/bin.1841