Assessing Consistency of Respondent-driven Sampling Estimators by Using Repeated Surveys Among People Who Inject Drugs (PWID) in New Jersey

Overview

Journal AIDS Behav

Specialty Infectious Diseases

Date 2024 Aug 9

PMID 39122905

Authors

Peng Wang

Afework Wogayehu

Barbara Bolden

Abdel R Ibrahim

Henry F Raymond

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

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.

References

Gile K, Handcock M . Respondent-Driven Sampling: An Assessment of Current Methodology. Sociol Methodol. 2012; 40(1):285-327. PMC: 3437336. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9531.2010.01223.x. View

Burt R, Thiede H . Evaluating consistency in repeat surveys of injection drug users recruited by respondent-driven sampling in the Seattle area: results from the NHBS-IDU1 and NHBS-IDU2 surveys. Ann Epidemiol. 2012; 22(5):354-63. PMC: 3338897. DOI: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2012.02.012. View

Fellows I . Respondent-driven sampling and the homophily configuration graph. Stat Med. 2018; 38(1):131-150. DOI: 10.1002/sim.7973. View

Stahlman S, Sanchez T, Sullivan P, Ketende S, Lyons C, Charurat M . The Prevalence of Sexual Behavior Stigma Affecting Gay Men and Other Men Who Have Sex with Men Across Sub-Saharan Africa and in the United States. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2016; 2(2):e35. PMC: 4978863. DOI: 10.2196/publichealth.5824. View

Lansky A, Abdul-Quader A, Cribbin M, Hall T, Finlayson T, Garfein R . Developing an HIV behavioral surveillance system for injecting drug users: the National HIV Behavioral Surveillance System. Public Health Rep. 2007; 122 Suppl 1:48-55. PMC: 1804107. DOI: 10.1177/00333549071220S108. View

Abdesselam K, Verdery A, Pelude L, Dhami P, Momoli F, Jolly A . The development of respondent-driven sampling (RDS) inference: A systematic review of the population mean and variance estimates. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2019; 206:107702. DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2019.107702. View

Gile K, Johnston L, Salganik M . Diagnostics for Respondent-driven Sampling. J R Stat Soc Ser A Stat Soc. 2016; 178(1):241-269. PMC: 4877136. DOI: 10.1111/rssa.12059. View

Wang P, Wei C, McFarland W, Raymond H . The Development and the Assessment of Sampling Methods for Hard-to-Reach Populations in HIV Surveillance. J Urban Health. 2024; 101(4):856-866. PMC: 11329483. DOI: 10.1007/s11524-024-00880-w. View

Wirtz A, Iyer J, Brooks D, Hailey-Fair K, Galai N, Beyrer C . An evaluation of assumptions underlying respondent-driven sampling and the social contexts of sexual and gender minority youth participating in HIV clinical trials in the United States. J Int AIDS Soc. 2021; 24(5):e25694. PMC: 8114466. DOI: 10.1002/jia2.25694. View

10.

Li J, Valente T, Shin H, Weeks M, Zelenev A, Moothi G . Overlooked Threats to Respondent Driven Sampling Estimators: Peer Recruitment Reality, Degree Measures, and Random Selection Assumption. AIDS Behav. 2017; 22(7):2340-2359. PMC: 5745307. DOI: 10.1007/s10461-017-1827-1. View

11.

Shaghaghi A, Bhopal R, Sheikh A . Approaches to Recruiting 'Hard-To-Reach' Populations into Re-search: A Review of the Literature. Health Promot Perspect. 2014; 1(2):86-94. PMC: 3963617. DOI: 10.5681/hpp.2011.009. View

12.

Khatib A, Haji S, Khamis M, Said C, Khalid F, Dahoma M . Reproducibility of Respondent-Driven Sampling (RDS) in Repeat Surveys of Men Who have Sex with Men, Unguja, Zanzibar. AIDS Behav. 2016; 21(7):2180-2187. DOI: 10.1007/s10461-016-1632-2. View

13.

Broz D, Wejnert C, Pham H, DiNenno E, Heffelfinger J, Cribbin M . HIV infection and risk, prevention, and testing behaviors among injecting drug users -- National HIV Behavioral Surveillance System, 20 U.S. cities, 2009. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2014; 63(6):1-51. View

14.

Wang P, Wogayehu A, Bolden B, Ibrahim A, Raymond H . Assessing reliability of naïve respondent-driven sampling samples by using repeated surveys among people who inject drugs (PWID) in New Jersey. Ann Epidemiol. 2024; 94:100-105. PMC: 11864107. DOI: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2024.05.001. View

15.

Gile K, Handcock M . Network Model-Assisted Inference from Respondent-Driven Sampling Data. J R Stat Soc Ser A Stat Soc. 2015; 178(3):619-639. PMC: 4669074. DOI: 10.1111/rssa.12091. View

16.

Lachowsky N, Sorge J, Raymond H, Cui Z, Sereda P, Rich A . 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. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2016; 16(1):157. PMC: 5112687. DOI: 10.1186/s12874-016-0258-4. View