Skip to main content

Table 3 OAKS collaborator survey responses, centre activity and data completeness at one-year postoperatively

From: Challenges of one-year longitudinal follow-up of a prospective, observational cohort study using an anonymised database: recommendations for trainee research collaboratives

 Respondent at a centre with ≥95% completeness
Yes (n = 141)No (n = 111)p-value
Stage of TrainingJunior Doctor47 (56.6)36 (43.4)0.929
Later Year Student52 (56.5)40 (43.5) 
Early Year Student41 (53.9)35 (46.1) 
Previous participation in initial phase of OAKS data collectionYes66 (56.4)51 (43.6)0.850
No74 (55.2)60 (44.8) 
Prior experience with auditYes65 (60.2)43 (39.8)0.222
No75 (52.4)68 (47.6) 
Rating of experience identifying consultantPositive (4–5)91 (58.7)64 (41.3)0.235
Not Positive (< 4)49 (51.0)47 (49.0) 
Rating of experience registering audit aPositive (4–5)67 (56.8)51 (43.2)0.763
Not Positive (< 4)73 (54.9)60 (45.1) 
Rating of experience linking Patient ID aPositive (4–5)96 (71.6)38 (28.4)< 0.001
Not Positive (< 4)44 (37.6)73 (62.4) 
Rating of experience collecting data aPositive (4–5)106 (59.2)73 (40.8)0.104
Not Positive (< 4)34 (47.9)37 (52.1) 
  1. aRated on a self-reported Likert scale between 1 (very difficult) and 5 (very easy)