Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33857165›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

A review of reported network degree and recruitment characteristics in respondent driven sampling implications for applied researchers and methodologists.

Lisa Avery, Alison Macpherson, Sarah Flicker, Michael Rotondi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lisa AveryDepartment of Kinesiology and Health Sciences, York University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-8431-5143
Alison MacphersonDepartment of Kinesiology and Health Sciences, York University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Sarah FlickerDepartment of Kinesiology and Health Sciences, York University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Michael RotondiDepartment of Kinesiology and Health Sciences, York University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
York University · CA

Funding

CIHR 162468
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveRespondent driven sampling (RDS) is an important tool for measuring disease prevalence in populations with no sampling frame. We aim to describe key properties of these samples to guide those using this method and to inform methodological research.

methodsIn 2019, authors who published respondent driven sampling studies were contacted with a request to share reported degree and network information. Of 59 author groups identified, 15 (25%) agreed to share data, representing 53 distinct study samples containing 36,547 participants across 12 countries and several target populations including migrants, sex workers and men who have sex with men. Distribution of reported network degree was described for each sample and characteristics of recruitment chains, and their relationship to coupons, were reported.

resultsReported network degree is severely skewed and is best represented by a log normal distribution. For participants connected to more than 15 other people, reported degree is imprecise and frequently rounded to the nearest five or ten. Our results indicate that many samples contain highly connected individuals, who may be connected to at least 1000 other people.

conclusionBecause very large reported degrees are common; we caution against treating these reports as outliers. The imprecise and skewed distribution of the reported degree should be incorporated into future RDS methodological studies to better capture real-world performance. Previous results indicating poor performance of regression estimators using RDS weights may be widely generalizable. Fewer recruitment coupons may be associated with longer recruitment chains.

Indexed as

Social NetworkingHumansPopulation SurveillanceSampling StudiesSelection BiasSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID33857165
PMCPMC8049306
OpenAlexW3155578630

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.