Respondent-Driven Sampling and the Recruitment of People with Small Injecting Networks
- 238 Downloads
Respondent-driven sampling (RDS) is a form of chain-referral sampling, similar to snowball sampling, which was developed to reach hidden populations such as people who inject drugs (PWID). RDS is said to reach members of a hidden population that may not be accessible through other sampling methods. However, less attention has been paid as to whether there are segments of the population that are more likely to be missed by RDS. This study examined the ability of RDS to capture people with small injecting networks. A study of PWID, using RDS, was conducted in 2009 in Sydney, Australia. The size of participants’ injecting networks was examined by recruitment chain and wave. Participants’ injecting network characteristics were compared to those of participants from a separate pharmacy-based study. A logistic regression analysis was conducted to examine the characteristics independently associated with having small injecting networks, using the combined RDS and pharmacy-based samples. In comparison with the pharmacy-recruited participants, RDS participants were almost 80% less likely to have small injecting networks, after adjusting for other variables. RDS participants were also more likely to have their injecting networks form a larger proportion of those in their social networks, and to have acquaintances as part of their injecting networks. Compared to those with larger injecting networks, individuals with small injecting networks were equally likely to engage in receptive sharing of injecting equipment, but less likely to have had contact with prevention services. These findings suggest that those with small injecting networks are an important group to recruit, and that RDS is less likely to capture these individuals.
KeywordsRespondent-driven sampling Injecting drug users Behavioural surveillance Hidden populations
The authors would like to thank Sione Crawford, Annie Granston, Brett Millar and Lucy Pepolim at the NSW Users and AIDS Association for providing expertise, logistical support and interview space to conduct this study. The authors would also like to thank the Kirketon Road Centre and the Central Access Service, St George Hospital, for their comments on the study’s protocol and for locating seeds. This work was supported by the South Eastern Sydney and Illawarra Area Health Service and the University of New South Wales.
- 4.Family Health International. Behavioral surveillance surveys. Guidelines for repeated behavioral surveys in populations at risk of HIV. Arlington: Family Health International; 2000.Google Scholar
- 9.Platt L, Wall M, Rhodes T, Judd A, Hickman M, Johnston LG, et al. Methods to recruit hard-to-reach groups: comparing two chain referral sampling methods of recruiting injecting drug users across nine studies in Russia and Estonia. J Urban Health. 2006;83(7 Suppl.):i39–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Rudolph AE, Crawford ND, Latkin C, Heimer R, Benjamin EO, Jones KC, et al. Subpopulations of illicit drug users reached by targeted street outreach and respondent-driven sampling strategies: implications for research and public health practice. Ann Epidemiol. 2011;21(4):280–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Buehler JW. Surveillance. In: Rothman KJ, Greenland S, editors. Modern epidemiology. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven; 1998. p. 435–57.Google Scholar
- 17.Kendall C, Kerr LRFS, Gondim RC, Werneck GL, Macena RHM, Pontes MK, et al. An empirical comparison of respondent-driven sampling, time location sampling, and snowball sampling for behavioral surveillance in men who have sex with men, Fortaleza, Brazil. AIDS Behav. 2008;12(Suppl. 1):S97–104.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Burt RD, Hagan H, Sabin K, Thiede H. Evaluating respondent-driven sampling in a major metropolitan area: comparing injection drug users in the 2005 Seattle Area National HIV Behavioral Surveillance System Survey with participants in the RAVEN and Kiwi studies. Ann Epidemiol. 2010;20(2):159–67.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.Paquette DM, Bryant J, de Wit J. A Respondent-Driven Sampling (RDS) Survey of people who inject drugs in South East Sydney: an assessment of RDS assumptions and requirements. Contemp Drug Probl. 2010;37:575–98.Google Scholar
- 24.Bryant J, Wilson H, Hull P, Treloar C. Pharmacy needle and syringe survey, New South Wales 2006–2008. Sydney: National Centre in HIV Social Research, The University of New South Wales; 2010.Google Scholar
- 29.Frost SDW, Brouwer KC, Firestone Cruz MA, Ramos R, Ramos ME, Lozada RM, et al. Respondent-driven sampling of injection drug users in two U.S.–Mexico border cities: recruitment dynamics and impact on estimates of HIV and syphilis prevalence. J Urban Health. 2006;83(Suppl. 1):83–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 34.Johnston LG. Behavioural surveillance: introduction to respondent driven sampling (participant manual). Atlanta: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2008.Google Scholar
- 36.Iguchi MY, Ober AJ, Berry SH, Fain T, Heckathorn DD, Gorbach PM, et al. Simultaneous recruitment of drug users and men who have sex with men in the United States and Russia using respondent-driven sampling: sampling methods and implications. J Urban Health. 2009;86(Suppl. 1):5–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar