Richard D Burt1, Hanne Thiede2. 1. HIV/STD Program, Public Health-Seattle & King County, Seattle, WA. Electronic address: richard.burt@kingcounty.gov. 2. HIV/STD Program, Public Health-Seattle & King County, Seattle, WA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Respondent-driven sampling (RDS) is a form of peer-based study recruitment and analysis that incorporates features designed to limit and adjust for biases in traditional snowball sampling. It is being widely used in studies of hidden populations. We report an empirical evaluation of RDS's consistency and variability, comparing groups recruited contemporaneously, by identical methods and using identical survey instruments. METHODS: We randomized recruitment chains from the RDS-based 2012 National HIV Behavioral Surveillance survey of injection drug users in the Seattle area into two groups and compared them in terms of sociodemographic characteristics, drug-associated risk behaviors, sexual risk behaviors, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) status and HIV testing frequency. RESULTS: The two groups differed in five of the 18 variables examined (P ≤ .001): race (e.g., 60% white vs. 47%), gender (52% male vs. 67%), area of residence (32% downtown Seattle vs. 44%), an HIV test in the previous 12 months (51% vs. 38%). The difference in serologic HIV status was particularly pronounced (4% positive vs. 18%). In four further randomizations, differences in one to five variables attained this level of significance, although the specific variables involved differed. CONCLUSIONS: We found some material differences between the randomized groups. Although the variability of the present study was less than has been reported in serial RDS surveys, these findings indicate caution in the interpretation of RDS results.
PURPOSE: Respondent-driven sampling (RDS) is a form of peer-based study recruitment and analysis that incorporates features designed to limit and adjust for biases in traditional snowball sampling. It is being widely used in studies of hidden populations. We report an empirical evaluation of RDS's consistency and variability, comparing groups recruited contemporaneously, by identical methods and using identical survey instruments. METHODS: We randomized recruitment chains from the RDS-based 2012 National HIV Behavioral Surveillance survey of injection drug users in the Seattle area into two groups and compared them in terms of sociodemographic characteristics, drug-associated risk behaviors, sexual risk behaviors, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) status and HIV testing frequency. RESULTS: The two groups differed in five of the 18 variables examined (P ≤ .001): race (e.g., 60% white vs. 47%), gender (52% male vs. 67%), area of residence (32% downtown Seattle vs. 44%), an HIV test in the previous 12 months (51% vs. 38%). The difference in serologic HIV status was particularly pronounced (4% positive vs. 18%). In four further randomizations, differences in one to five variables attained this level of significance, although the specific variables involved differed. CONCLUSIONS: We found some material differences between the randomized groups. Although the variability of the present study was less than has been reported in serial RDS surveys, these findings indicate caution in the interpretation of RDS results.
Authors: G Paz-Bailey; J O Jacobson; M E Guardado; F M Hernandez; A I Nieto; M Estrada; J Creswell Journal: Sex Transm Infect Date: 2011-03-08 Impact factor: 3.519
Authors: Abby E Rudolph; Natalie D Crawford; Carl Latkin; Robert Heimer; Ebele O Benjamin; Kandice C Jones; Crystal M Fuller Journal: Ann Epidemiol Date: 2011-04 Impact factor: 3.797
Authors: Nicky McCreesh; Simon D W Frost; Janet Seeley; Joseph Katongole; Matilda N Tarsh; Richard Ndunguse; Fatima Jichi; Natasha L Lunel; Dermot Maher; Lisa G Johnston; Pam Sonnenberg; Andrew J Copas; Richard J Hayes; Richard G White Journal: Epidemiology Date: 2012-01 Impact factor: 4.822
Authors: Sharon S Weir; M Giovanna Merli; Jing Li; Anisha D Gandhi; William W Neely; Jessie K Edwards; Chirayath M Suchindran; Gail E Henderson; Xiang-Sheng Chen Journal: Sex Transm Infect Date: 2012-12 Impact factor: 3.519
Authors: William M Miller; William C Miller; Clare Barrington; Sharon S Weir; Sanny Y Chen; Michael E Emch; Audrey E Pettifor; Gabriela Paz-Bailey Journal: AIDS Behav Date: 2017-12
Authors: Sabriya L Linton; Don C Des Jarlais; Joseph T Ornstein; Matt Kasman; Ross Hammond; Behzad Kianian; Justin C Smith; Mary E Wolfe; Zev Ross; Danielle German; Colin Flynn; Henry F Raymond; R Monina Klevens; Emma Spencer; John-Mark Schacht; Teresa Finlayson; Gabriela Paz-Bailey; Cyprian Wejnert; Hannah L F Cooper Journal: Int J Drug Policy Date: 2021-03-31