Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24416371›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Online respondent-driven sampling for studying contact patterns relevant for the spread of close-contact pathogens: a pilot study in Thailand.

Mart L Stein, Jim E van Steenbergen, Charnchudhi Chanyasanha, Mathuros Tipayamongkholgul, Vincent Buskens, Peter G M van der Heijden, Wasamon Sabaiwan, Linus Bengtsson, Xin Lu, Anna E Thorson and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.3field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 8 institutions in 5 countries.

Mart L SteinJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands ; Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
Jim E van SteenbergenCentre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, The Netherlands ; Centre for Infectious Diseases, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Charnchudhi ChanyasanhaDepartment of Microbiology, Faculty of Public Health, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Mathuros TipayamongkholgulDepartment of Epidemiology, Faculty of Public Health, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Vincent BuskensFaculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, University Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Peter G M van der HeijdenFaculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, University Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands ; Southampton Statistical Sciences Research Institute, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom.
Wasamon SabaiwanFaculty of Communication Arts, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Linus BengtssonDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Xin LuDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden ; College of Information System and Management, National University of Defense Technology, Changsha, China.
Anna E ThorsonDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Mirjam E E KretzschmarJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands ; Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
Karolinska Institutet · SEMahidol University · THUniversity Medical Center Utrecht · NLChulalongkorn University · THLeiden University · NLNational University of Defense Technology · CNUniversity of Southampton · GBUtrecht University · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInformation on social interactions is needed to understand the spread of airborne infections through a population. Previous studies mostly collected egocentric information of independent respondents with self-reported information about contacts. Respondent-driven sampling (RDS) is a sampling technique allowing respondents to recruit contacts from their social network. We explored the feasibility of webRDS for studying contact patterns relevant for the spread of respiratory pathogens. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe developed a webRDS system for facilitating and tracking recruitment by Facebook and email. One-day diary surveys were conducted by applying webRDS among a convenience sample of Thai students. Students were asked to record numbers of contacts at different settings and self-reported influenza-like-illness symptoms, and to recruit four contacts whom they had met in the previous week. Contacts were asked to do the same to create a network tree of socially connected individuals. Correlations between linked individuals were analysed to investigate assortativity within networks.

resultsWe reached up to 6 waves of contacts of initial respondents, using only non-material incentives. Forty-four (23.0%) of the initially approached students recruited one or more contacts. In total 257 persons participated, of which 168 (65.4%) were recruited by others. Facebook was the most popular recruitment option (45.1%). Strong assortative mixing was seen by age, gender and education, indicating a tendency of respondents to connect to contacts with similar characteristics. Random mixing was seen by reported number of daily contacts.

conclusionsDespite methodological challenges (e.g. clustering among respondents and their contacts), applying RDS provides new insights in mixing patterns relevant for close-contact infections in real-world networks. Such information increases our knowledge of the transmission of respiratory infections within populations and can be used to improve existing modelling approaches. It is worthwhile to further develop and explore webRDS for the detection of clusters of respiratory symptoms in social networks.

Indexed as

InternetInterpersonal RelationsSocial SupportAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansInfluenza, HumanMalePilot ProjectsThailand

Identifiers

PMID24416371
PMCPMC3885693
OpenAlexW2116715332

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.