ArticleBMC medical research methodology2015
Aiming for a representative sample: Simulating random versus purposive strategies for hospital selection.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Encouraging Clinical Trial Participation Through Qualitative Study and Behavior Change Methodology.Circulation. Population health and outcomes · 2026Article
- Implementing quality and safety regulations in residential disability services: a qualitative interview study.BMJ quality & safety · 2026Article
- From awareness to adoption: a panoramic perspective on the utilization of Internet Medical Services among Chinese patients with chronic disease.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Use of appropriate statistical tools in biomedical research: Current trend & status.The Indian journal of medical research · 2023Article
- Computational phenotypes for patients with opioid-related disorders presenting to the emergency department.PloS one · 2023Article
- Sources of anxiety among health care workers in Tehran during the COVID-19 pandemic.Health policy and planning · 2022Article
- Article
- Education as a dimension of human development: A Provincial-level Education Index for Ecuador.PloS one · 2022Article
- Improving treatment outcomes for leprosy in Pernambuco, Brazil: a qualitative study exploring the experiences and perceptions of retreatment patients and their carers.BMC infectious diseases · 2021Article
- Managing work flow in high enrolling trials: The development and implementation of a sampling strategy in the PREPARE trial.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2021Article
- Article
- Usability Evaluation for the Amulet Wearable Device in Rural Older Adults with Obesity.Gerontechnology : international journal on the fundamental aspects of technology to serve the ageing society · 2018Article
- Technology for Behavioral Change in Rural Older Adults with Obesity.Journal of nutrition in gerontology and geriatricsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA ubiquitous issue in research is that of selecting a representative sample from the study population. While random sampling strategies are the gold standard, in practice, random sampling of participants is not always feasible nor necessarily the optimal choice. In our case, a selection must be made of 12 hospitals (out of 89 Dutch hospitals in total). With this selection of 12 hospitals, it should be possible to estimate blood use in the remaining hospitals as well. In this paper, we evaluate both random and purposive strategies for the case of estimating blood use in Dutch hospitals.
methodsAvailable population-wide data on hospital blood use and number of hospital beds are used to simulate five sampling strategies: (1) select only the largest hospitals, (2) select the largest and the smallest hospitals ('maximum variation'), (3) select hospitals randomly, (4) select hospitals from as many different geographic regions as possible, (5) select hospitals from only two regions. Simulations of each strategy result in different selections of hospitals, that are each used to estimate blood use in the remaining hospitals. The estimates are compared to the actual population values; the subsequent prediction errors are used to indicate the quality of the sampling strategy.
resultsThe strategy leading to the lowest prediction error in the case study was maximum variation sampling, followed by random, regional variation and two-region sampling, with sampling the largest hospitals resulting in the worst performance. Maximum variation sampling led to a hospital level prediction error of 15%, whereas random sampling led to a prediction error of 19% (95% CI 17%-26%). While lowering the sample size reduced the differences between maximum variation and the random strategies, increasing sample size to n = 18 did not change the ranking of the strategies and led to only slightly better predictions.
conclusionsThe optimal strategy for estimating blood use was maximum variation sampling. When proxy data are available, it is possible to evaluate random and purposive sampling strategies using simulations before the start of the study. The results enable researchers to make a more educated choice of an appropriate sampling strategy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.