Advertisement

Sampling Issues in Drug Epidemiology

  • Colin Taylor
  • Paul Griffiths
Chapter

Keywords

Target Population Drug User Sampling Frame Drug Abuser Snowball Sample 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bieleman, B., Diaz, A., Merlo, G., and Kaplan Ch.D. (1993). Lines across Europe: nature and extent of cocaine use in Barcelona, Rotterdam and Turin. Svets and Zeitlinger, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  2. Biernacki, P. and Waldorf, D. (1981). Snowball sampling: Problems and techniques of chain referral sampling. Sociological Methods and Research 10(2), pp. 141–163.Google Scholar
  3. Buster, M.C.A., van Brussel, G.H.A., and van de Brink, W. (2001). Estimating the number of opiate users in Amsterdam by capture-recapture: The importance of case definition. European Journal of Epidemiology 17, pp. 935–942.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Clarke, K., Sheridan, J., Griffiths, P., Noble, N., Williamson, S., and Taylor. C. (2001). Pharmacy needle exchange: do clients and community pharmacists have matching perceptions? Pharmaceutical Journal 266, pp. 553–556.Google Scholar
  5. Cottler et al., 2001. L. Cottler, S.B. Womack, W.M. Compton and A. Ben-Abdallah, Ecstasy abuse and dependence among adolescents and young adults: applicability and reliability of DSM-IV criteria. Hum. Psychopharmacol.: Clin. Exp. 16 (2001), pp. 599–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Currie, C., Roberts, C., Morgan, A. et. al. (2004). Young People’s Health in Context. Health Behaviour in School Aged Children (HBSC) Study, International Report From The 2001/2002 Survey, Health Policy for Children and Adolescents, No 4, World Health Organization, Geneva.Google Scholar
  7. Degenhardt et al., in press. Degenhardt, L., Barker, B., Topp, L., in press. Ecstasy use in Australia: findings from a general population survey. Addiction.Google Scholar
  8. European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction. (2003). Annual Report 2003: The State of the Drug Problem in the European Union and Norway. European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction, Lisbon.Google Scholar
  9. Fountain, J. (Ed). (2004). Young Refugees and Asylum Seekers in Greater London: Vulnerability to Problematic Drug Use. Greater London Alcohol and Drug Alliance, Greater London Authority, London.Google Scholar
  10. Fountain, J., Hartnoll, H., Olszewski, D., and Vicente J. (2000). (Eds.), Understanding and Responding to Drug Use: The Role of Qualitative Research. EMCDDA Scientific Monograph Series No. 4., EMCDDA, Lisbon.Google Scholar
  11. Goodman, L.A. (1961). Snowball sampling. Annals of Mathematical Statistics 32, pp. 148–170.Google Scholar
  12. Griffiths, P., Gossop, M., Powis, B., and Strang, J. (1993). Reaching populations of drug users by the use of privileged access interviewers: methodological and practical issues. Addiction 88, pp. 1617–1626.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hartnoll R. (1997). Estimating the Prevalence of Problem Drug use in Europe. In: Stimson G.V., Hickman M., Quirk A., Frischer M. and Taylor C. (Eds.), EMCDDA Scientific Monograph Series (No. 1). Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxemburg.Google Scholar
  14. Hendricks, V.M., Blanken, P., and Adriaans, N.F.P. (1992). Snowball Sampling: A Pilot Study on Cocaine Use. IVO, Rotterdam.Google Scholar
  15. Hibell, B., Andersson, B., Ahlstrom, S. et al. (2000). The 1999 ESPAD Report: The European School Survey Project on Alcohol and Other Drugs. The Swedish Council for Information on Alcohol and other drugs (CAN) and Council of Europe Pompidou Group.Google Scholar
  16. Hser, Y., Anglin, M.D., Wickens, T.D., Brecht, M.L., and Homer J. (1992). Techniques for the Estimation of Illicit Drug User Prevalence: An Overview of Relevant Issues. National Institute of Justice, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  17. Inciardi, J. and Harrison, L. (Eds.) (2000), Harm Reduction: National and International Perspectives. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.Google Scholar
  18. Johnston, L.D., O’Malley, P.M., Bachman, J.G., and Schulenberg, J.E. (2004). Monitoring The Future National Survey Results on Drug Use, 1975–2003. Volume I: Secondary School Students. National Institute on Drug Abuse, Bethesda, MD.Google Scholar
  19. McKeganey N. Barnard M. Leyland A. Coote I., and Follet E. (1992). Female street-working prostitution and HIV infection in Glasgow. British Medical Journal 305, pp. 801–804.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. McKeganey, N. and Platt, S. (1993). Estimating the population prevalence of injection drug use and infection with human immunodeficiency virus among injection drug users in Glasgow, Scotland. American Journal of Epidemiology, 138(3), pp. 170–181.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Parker, H., Newcombe, R., and Bakx K. (1987). The new heroin users: prevalence and characteristics in Wirral, Merseyside. British Journal of Addiction 82, p. 4757.Google Scholar
  22. Power, R. and Harkinson, S. (1993). Accessing hidden populations: A survey of indigenous interviewers. In Davies, P., Hart, G., and Aggleton, P. (Eds.), Social aspects of AIDS. Falmer Press, New York. pp. 109–119.Google Scholar
  23. Rapoport, A. (1979). Some problems relating to randomly constructed biased networks. In Holland, P.W. and Leinhardt, S. (Eds.), Perspectives on Social Network Research. Academic Press, New York. pp. 119–136.Google Scholar
  24. Rapoport, A. (1980). A probabilistic approach to networks. Social Networks 2, pp. 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Stimson, G.V., Hickman, M., Quirk, A., Frischer, M., and Taylor C. (Eds.), (1997). Estimating the Prevalence of Problem Drug use in Europe. EMCDDA Scientific Monograph Series (No. 1). Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxemburg.Google Scholar
  26. Taylor, C. (1997). Introduction to multiplier methods. In: Stimson, G., Hickman M., Quirk A. and Frischer M. (Eds.), Estimating the Prevalence of Drug Misuse in Europe. Council of Europe, Strasbourg, pp. 111–112.Google Scholar
  27. TenHouten, W.D., Stern, J., and TenHouten D. (1971). Political Leadership in Poor Communities: Applications of Two Sampling Methodologies. In: Orleans, P. and Ellis Jr., W.R. Race, Change and Urban Society, Vol 5, Urban Affairs Annual Review, Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, CA.Google Scholar
  28. Thompson, S.K. And Seber, G.A.F. (1996). Adaptive Sampling. John Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  29. Topp L., Degenhardt L., and Barker B. (2004). The external validity of results derived from ecstasy users recruited using purposive sampling strategies. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, Volume 73, Issue 1, 7 January 2004, pp. 33–40m in Science Direct.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Trotter, R. and Medina-Mora, M-E. (2000). In: Guide to Drug Abuse Epidemiology. WHO/MSD/MSB 00.3, World Health Organization, Geneva.Google Scholar
  31. United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime. (2003). Global Assessment Programme on Drug Abuse (GAP) Toolkit Module 3 Conducting School Surveys on Drug Abuse. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Vienna.Google Scholar
  32. Vogt, W.P. (1999). Dictionary of Statistics and Methodology: A Non-Technical Guide for the Social Sciences. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.Google Scholar
  33. Winstock, A.R., Griffiths, P., and Stewart, D. (2001). Drugs and the dance music scene: A survey of current drug use patterns among a sample of dance music enthusiasts in the UK. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 64(1), pp. 9–17.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Colin Taylor
    • 1
  • Paul Griffiths
    • 1
  1. 1.European Monitoring Centre on Drugs and Drug AddictionLisbonPortugal

Personalised recommendations