Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology for respondent-driven sampling studies: "STROBE-RDS" statement

Richard G White, Avi J Hakim, Matthew J Salganik, Michael W Spiller, Lisa G Johnston, Ligia Kerr, Carl Kendall, Amy Drake, David Wilson, Kate Orroth, Matthias Egger, Wolfgang Hladik, Richard G White, Avi J Hakim, Matthew J Salganik, Michael W Spiller, Lisa G Johnston, Ligia Kerr, Carl Kendall, Amy Drake, David Wilson, Kate Orroth, Matthias Egger, Wolfgang Hladik

Abstract

Objectives: Respondent-driven sampling (RDS) is a new data collection methodology used to estimate characteristics of hard-to-reach groups, such as the HIV prevalence in drug users. Many national public health systems and international organizations rely on RDS data. However, RDS reporting quality and available reporting guidelines are inadequate. We carried out a systematic review of RDS studies and present Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology for RDS Studies (STROBE-RDS), a checklist of essential items to present in RDS publications, justified by an explanation and elaboration document.

Study design and setting: We searched the MEDLINE (1970-2013), EMBASE (1974-2013), and Global Health (1910-2013) databases to assess the number and geographical distribution of published RDS studies. STROBE-RDS was developed based on STROBE guidelines, following Guidance for Developers of Health Research Reporting Guidelines.

Results: RDS has been used in over 460 studies from 69 countries, including the USA (151 studies), China (70), and India (32). STROBE-RDS includes modifications to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The two key areas that required modification concerned the selection of participants and statistical analysis of the sample.

Conclusion: STROBE-RDS seeks to enhance the transparency and utility of research using RDS. If widely adopted, STROBE-RDS should improve global infectious diseases public health decision making.

Keywords: Biomedical research/methods; Cross-sectional studies; Epidemiologic research design; Epidemiologic studies; Guidelines as topic; Guidelines as topic/standards; Humans; Observation/methods; Practice guidelines as topic; Publishing/standards; Research design.

Copyright © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
(A) Number of published peer-reviewed studies using respondent-driven sampling 1990–July 2013. * = part year. (B) World map showing number of published peer-reviewed studies using respondent-driven sampling 1990–July 2013, by country.

References

    1. Anderson R., May R. Oxford University Press; Oxford: 1991. Infectious diseases of humans: dynamics and control.
    1. Rothman K.J., Greeenland S. 2nd ed. Lippincott Williams & Williams; Philadelphia: 1997. Modern epidemiology.
    1. 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–S72.
    1. Heckathorn D.D. Respondent-driven sampling: a new approach to the study of hidden populations. Social Probl. 1997;44(2):174–199.
    1. Malekinejad M., Johnston L., Kendall C., Kerr L., Rifkin M., Rutherford G. Using respondent-driven sampling methodology for HIV biological and behavioral surveillance in international settings: a systematic review. AIDS Behav. 2008;12:105–130.
    1. Salganik M.J., Heckathorn D.D. Sampling and estimation in hidden populations using respondent-driven sampling. Sociol Methodol. 2004;34(1):193–240.
    1. Heckathorn D.D. Extensions of respondent-driven sampling: analyzing continuous variables and controlling for differential recruitment. Sociol Methodol. 2007;37(1):151–207.
    1. Volz E., Heckathorn D. Probability based estimation theory for respondent driven sampling. J Off Stat. 2008;24(1):79–97.
    1. Gile K.J. Improved inference for respondent-driven sampling data with application to HIV prevalence estimation. J Am Stat Assoc. 2011;106:135–146.
    1. Gile KJ, Handcock MS. Network model-assisted inference from respondent-driven sampling data. arXiv preprint arXiv:11080298 2011.
    1. Lu X, Malmros J, Liljeros F, Britton T. Respondent-driven sampling on directed networks. Arxiv preprint arXiv:12011927 2012.
    1. McCreesh N., Copas A., Seeley J., Johnston L.G., Sonnenberg P., Hayes R.J. Respondent driven sampling: determinants of recruitment and a method to improve point estimation. PLoS One. 2013;8:e78402.
    1. Evans-Campbell T., Lindhorst T., Huang B., Walters K.L. Interpersonal violence in the lives of urban American Indian and Alaska Native women: implications for health, mental health, and help-seeking. Am J Public Health. 2006;96:1416–1422.
    1. Clark M.A., Neighbors C.J., Wasserman M.R., Armstrong G.F., Drnach M.L., Howie S.L. Strategies and cost of recruitment of middle-aged and older unmarried women in a cancer screening study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2007;16(12):2605–2614.
    1. Mouw T., Verdery A.M. Network sampling with memory: a proposal for more efficient sampling from social networks. Sociol Methodol. 2012;42(1):206–256.
    1. Montealegre J.R., Johnston L.G., Murrill C., Monterroso E. Respondent driven sampling for HIV biological and behavioral surveillance in Latin America and the Caribbean. AIDS Behav. 2013;17:2313–2340.
    1. Hafeez S. LSHTM; London: 2012. A review of the proposed STROBE-RDS reporting checklist as an effective tool for assessing the reporting quality of RDS studies from the developing world.
    1. von Elm E., Altman D.G., Egger M., Pocock S.J., Gotzsche P.C., Vandenbroucke J.P. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Plos Med. 2007;4:e296.
    1. Vandenbroucke J.P., von Elm E., Altman D.G. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration. Plos Med. 2007;4:e297.
    1. STROBE . 2007. STROBE checklist for cross-sectional studies. Available at. Accessed June 13, 2015.
    1. von Elm E., Altman D.G., Egger M., Pocock S.J., Gotzsche P.C., Vandenbroucke J.P. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61:344–349.
    1. Gallo V., Egger M., McCormack V., Farmer P.B., Loannidis J.P., Kirsch-Volders M. STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology–Molecular Epidemiology STROBE-ME: an extension of the STROBE statement. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:1350–1363.
    1. Little J., Higgins J.P., Ioannidis J.P., Moher D., Gagnon F., von Elm E. Strengthening the reporting of genetic association studies (STREGA): an extension of the strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62:597–608. 608.e4.
    1. Moher D., Schulz K.F., Simera I., Altman D.G. Guidance for developers of health research reporting guidelines. Plos Med. 2010;7:e1000217.
    1. White RG. Respondent-driven sampling: where we are and where we are/should be going? 19th Biennial ISSTDR conference; 2011; Quebec; 2011.
    1. Equator Network Equator Network. Available at. Accessed June 13, 2015.
    1. RDS list server. Available at (). .
    1. White R.G., Lansky A., Goel S., Wilson D., Hladik W., Hakim A. Respondent driven sampling—where we are and where should we be going? Sex Transm infect. 2012;88:397–399.
    1. Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology: respondent driven sampling surveys: STROBE-RDS. 2012. Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine; New Orleans: 2012. (29-30th Oct 2012)
    1. Salganik M.J. Variance estimation, design effects, and sample size calculations for respondent-driven sampling. J Urban Health. 2006;83:i98–112.
    1. Szwarcwald C.L., de Souza Junior P.R., Damacena G.N., Junior A.B., Kendall C. Analysis of data collected by RDS among sex workers in 10 Brazilian cities, 2009: estimation of the prevalence of HIV, variance, and design effect. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2011;57:S129–S135.
    1. Weir S.S., Merli M.G., Li J., Gandhi A.D., Neely W.W., Edwards J.K. A comparison of respondent-driven and venue-based sampling of female sex workers in Liuzhou, China. Sex Transm infect. 2012;88:i95–i101.
    1. McCreesh N., Frost S.D.W., Seeley J., Katongole J., Tarsh M.N., Ndunguse R. Evaluation of respondent-driven sampling. Epidemiology. 2012;23:138–147.
    1. Goel S., Salganik M.J. Assessing respondent-driven sampling. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010;107:6743–6747.
    1. Wejnert C. An empirical test of respondent-driven sampling: point estimates, variance, degree measures, and out-of-equilibrium data. Sociol Methodol. 2009;39(1):73–116.
    1. Tomas A., Gile K.J. The effect of differential recruitment, non-response and non-recruitment on estimators for respondent-driven sampling. Electron J Stat. 2011;5:899–934.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors et collaborateurs

Les conditions médicales

Interventions en matière de drogue

3
S'abonner