Recruiting Injection Drug Users: a Three-site Comparison of Results and Experiences with Respondent-driven and Targeted Sampling Procedures

Overview

Journal J Urban Health

Publisher Springer

Specialty General Medicine

Date 2006 Aug 26

PMID 16933101

Citations 62

Authors

William T Robinson

Jan M H Risser

Shanell McGoy

Adam B Becker

Hafeez Rehman

Mary Jefferson

Vivian Griffin

Marcia Wolverton

Stephanie Tortu

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Several recent studies have utilized respondent-driven sampling (RDS) methods to survey hidden populations such as commercial sex-workers, men who have sex with men (MSM) and injection drug users (IDU). Few studies, however, have provided a direct comparison between RDS and other more traditional sampling methods such as venue-based, targeted or time/space sampling. The current study sampled injection drug users in three U.S. cities using RDS and targeted sampling (TS) methods and compared their effectiveness in terms of recruitment efficiency, logistics, and sample demographics. Both methods performed satisfactorily. The targeted method required more staff time per-recruited respondent and had a lower proportion of screened respondents who were eligible than RDS, while RDS respondents were offered higher incentives for participation.

Citing Articles

The Development and the Assessment of Sampling Methods for Hard-to-Reach Populations in HIV Surveillance.

Wang P, Wei C, McFarland W, Raymond H J Urban Health. 2024; 101(4):856-866.

PMID: 38787451 PMC: 11329483. DOI: 10.1007/s11524-024-00880-w.

Integration of a geospatially targeted community-based testing approach with respondent-driven sampling to identify people who inject drugs living with HIV and HCV in Patti and Gorakhpur, India.

Loeb T, McFall A, Srikrishnan A, Anand S, Vasudevan C, Mehta S Drug Alcohol Depend. 2023; 247:109874.

PMID: 37087926 PMC: 10612114. DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2023.109874.

Factors associated with injury and blood-borne infection risk when providing assisted injection among people who inject drugs.

Ceasar R, Goldshear J, Brothers S, Wenger L, Kral A, Bluthenthal R Int J Drug Policy. 2021; 97:103297.

PMID: 34077825 PMC: 9844096. DOI: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2021.103297.

An application of agent-based modeling to explore the impact of decreasing incarceration rates and increasing drug treatment access on sero-discordant partnerships among people who inject drugs.

Linton S, Des Jarlais D, Ornstein J, Kasman M, Hammond R, Kianian B Int J Drug Policy. 2021; 94:103194.

PMID: 33812133 PMC: 8608566. DOI: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2021.103194.

Factors associated with health-related cannabis use intentions among a community sample of people who inject drugs in Los Angeles and San Francisco, CA 2016 to 2018.

Ceasar R, Kral A, Simpson K, Wenger L, Goldshear J, Bluthenthal R Drug Alcohol Depend. 2020; 219:108421.

PMID: 33301996 PMC: 7856255. DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2020.108421.

References

Wang J, Carlson R, Falck R, Siegal H, Rahman A, Li L . Respondent-driven sampling to recruit MDMA users: a methodological assessment. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2005; 78(2):147-57. DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2004.10.011. View

Kral A, Bluthenthal R, Booth R, Watters J . HIV seroprevalence among street-recruited injection drug and crack cocaine users in 16 US municipalities. Am J Public Health. 1998; 88(1):108-13. PMC: 1508387. DOI: 10.2105/ajph.88.1.108. View

Abdul-Quader A, Heckathorn D, McKnight C, Bramson H, Nemeth C, Sabin K . Effectiveness of respondent-driven sampling for recruiting drug users in New York City: findings from a pilot study. J Urban Health. 2006; 83(3):459-76. PMC: 2527186. DOI: 10.1007/s11524-006-9052-7. View

Magnani R, Sabin K, Saidel T, Heckathorn D . Review of sampling hard-to-reach and hidden populations for HIV surveillance. AIDS. 2005; 19 Suppl 2:S67-72. DOI: 10.1097/01.aids.0000172879.20628.e1. View

Semaan S, Lauby J, Liebman J . Street and network sampling in evaluation studies of HIV risk-reduction interventions. AIDS Rev. 2003; 4(4):213-23. View