ArticleDrug and alcohol dependence2022
Extent and implications of omitted ties on network measures in a longitudinal social network survey of people who use drugs.
Article in Drug and alcohol dependence, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predicting fatal opioid-involved overdoses: A social-ecological framework matched to a linked-data warehouse.The International journal on drug policy · 2025Article
- Exploring core symptoms of alcohol withdrawal syndrome in alcohol use disorder patients: a network analysis approach.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrevious research has revealed under-reporting of personal network members (i.e., alters) in studies involving people who use drugs (PWUD). This analysis (1) characterizes relationships that were more likely to be omitted but later recalled with prompting and (2) identifies network structural characteristics most impacted by these omissions among a sample of PWUD in rural Appalachian Kentucky, an epicenter of the opioid epidemic.
methodsData were collected through longitudinal assessments as part of the Social Networks Among Appalachian People (SNAP) study (2008-2017). Study participants completed interviewer-administered questionnaires that collected social network data via free-listing at baseline and six-month intervals. At visit 5, after free-listing, interviewers prompted participants with the names of previously reported alters. We used modified Poisson regression with generalized estimating equations to identify individual- and relationship-level characteristics associated with an alter being reported only after prompting. We examined the impact of including vs. excluding relationships reported after prompting on local and global sociometric network measures (i.e., betweenness centrality, bridging, density, mean degree, transitivity, cliques, and 2-cores).
resultsRelationships reported only after prompting were more likely to be immediate family (Adjusted Prevalence Ratio [APR]:1.29; 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 1.03-1.63) and less likely to involve sex (APR:0.54; 95% CI: 0.43-0.67). Considerable differences were observed for participant positional rankings of betweenness centrality and bridging, and differences in network density and average degree pre- and post-prompting were statistically significant.
conclusionLongitudinal network studies that aim to assess transmission dynamics, information diffusion, or peer influence should consider the effects of omitted relationships.
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.