ArticleBMC medical research methodology2016
Does size really matter? A sensitivity analysis of number of seeds in a respondent-driven sampling study of gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men in Vancouver, Canada.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Measuring Network Sizes in the Context of Respondent Driven Sampling: Evidence from Two Independent Surveys.Survey research methods · 2025Article
- Assessing Consistency of Respondent-driven Sampling Estimators by Using Repeated Surveys among People Who Inject Drugs (PWID) in New Jersey.AIDS and behavior · 2024Article
- Evaluation of respondent-driven sampling in seven studies of people who use drugs from rural populations: findings from the Rural Opioid Initiative.BMC medical research methodology · 2024Article
- Examining differential success in recruitment using respondent driven sampling (RDS) in a multi-site study of gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men.BMC medical research methodology · 2023Article
- Nominal Versus Realized Costs of Recruiting and Retaining a National Sample of Sexual Minority Adolescents in the United States: Longitudinal Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Article
- Application of Bayesian networks to identify factors influencing acceptability of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis in Guilin, China.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- HIV prevalence and associated factors among female sex workers in Ethiopia, east Africa: A cross-sectional study using a respondent-driven sampling technique.EClinicalMedicine · 2022Article
- Summarizing methods for estimating population size for key populations: a global scoping review for human immunodeficiency virus research.AIDS research and therapy · 2022Article
- Article
- Project BESPOKE (Integrated Bio-Behavioral Assessment of HIV and STI Among Young Tertiary Student Men Who Have Sex With Men in Nairobi, Kenya): A Respondent-Driven Sampling Survey Protocol.Frontiers in public health · 2021Article
- Implementing Respondent-Driven Sampling to Recruit Women Who Exchange Sex in New York City: Factors Associated with Recruitment and Lessons Learned.AIDS and behavior · 2020Article
- A Longitudinal Examination of Factors Associated with Network Bridging Among YMSM: Implications for HIV Prevention.AIDS and behavior · 2019Article
- HIV Testing Among a Representative Community Sample of Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex with Men in Vancouver, Canada.AIDS and behavior · 2019Article
- Seroadaptive Strategies of Vancouver Gay and Bisexual Men in a Treatment as Prevention Environment.Journal of homosexuality · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRespondent-driven sampling (RDS) is an increasingly used peer chain-recruitment method to sample "hard-to-reach" populations for whom there are no reliable sampling frames. Implementation success of RDS varies; one potential negative factor being the number of seeds used.
methodsWe conducted a sensitivity analysis on estimates produced using data from an RDS study of gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM) aged ≥16 years living in Vancouver, Canada. Participants completed a questionnaire on demographics, sexual behavior and substance use. For analysis, we used increasing seed exclusion criteria, starting with all participants and subsequently removing unproductive seeds, chains of ≤1 recruitment waves, and chains of ≤2 recruitment waves. We calculated estimates for three different outcomes (HIV serostatus, condomless anal intercourse with HIV discordant/unknown status partner, and injecting drugs) using three different RDS weighting procedures: RDS-I, RDS-II, and RDS-SS. We also assessed seed dependence with bottleneck analyses and convergence plots. Statistical differences between RDS estimators were assessed through simulation analysis.
resultsOverall, 719 participants were recruited, which included 119 seeds and a maximum of 16 recruitment waves (mean chain length = 1.7). The sample of >0 recruitment waves removed unproductive seeds (n = 50/119, 42.0%), resulting in 69 chains (mean length = 3.0). The sample of >1 recruitment waves removed 125 seeds or recruits (17.4% of overall sample), resulting in 37 chains (mean length = 4.8). The final sample of >2 recruitment waves removed a further 182 seeds or recruits (25.3% of overall sample), resulting in 25 chains (mean length = 6.1). Convergence plots and bottleneck analyses of condomless anal intercourse with HIV discordant/unknown status partner and injecting drugs outcomes were satisfactory. For these two outcomes, regardless of seed exclusion criteria used, the crude proportions fell within 95% confidence intervals of all RDS-weighted estimates. Significant differences between the three RDS estimators were not observed.
conclusionsWithin a sample of GBMSM in Vancouver, Canada, this RDS study suggests that when equilibrium and homophily are met, although potentially costly and time consuming, analysis is not negatively affected by large numbers of unproductive or lowly productive seeds.
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.