ArticleAIDS and behavior2024
Assessing Consistency of Respondent-driven Sampling Estimators by Using Repeated Surveys among People Who Inject Drugs (PWID) in New Jersey.
Article in AIDS and behavior, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Respondent-driven sampling (RDS) is widely used to sample populations with higher risk of HIV infection for whom no sampling frames exist. However, few studies have been done to assess the consistency of RDS estimators in real world settings. We conducted an assessment study on the consistency of RDS estimators using data from the National HIV Behavioral Surveillance - People Who Inject Drugs surveys in Newark, New Jersey from 2005 to 2018. Population parameter estimates based on RDS-I, RDS-II, Gile's SS, and HCG were compared longitudinally and cross-sectionally. Population homophily statistics and differential recruitment statistics were estimated and compared. Convergence plots were used for RDS diagnosis. Sensitivity analyses were conducted on population size estimates and seeds biases. By comparing time-insensitive population parameters and population homophily statistics estimated by four RDS estimators, the study found that RDS-II and Gile's SS could provide longitudinally and cross-sectionally consistent estimates and population homophily statistics on gender and sexual orientation. Cross-sectional comparison of time-sensitive population parameter estimates also supported the consistency of RDS-II and Gile's SS. However, RDS-I and HCG did not perform well in those comparisons. In conclusion, RDS estimators may not address all inconsistencies, but RDS-II and Gile's SS are recommended to weight RDS samples given enough consistency was observed in them.
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.