Search

The network scale-up method is a promising technique that uses sampled social network data to estimate the sizes of epidemiologically important hidden populations, such as sex workers and people who inject illicit drugs. Although previous scale-up research has focused exclusively on networks of acquaintances, we show that the type of personal network about which survey respondents are asked to report is a potentially crucial parameter that researchers are free to vary. This generalization leads to a method that is more flexible and potentially more accurate. In 2011, we conducted a large, nationally representative survey experiment in Rwanda that randomized respondents to report about one of 2 different personal networks. Our results showed that asking respondents for less information can, somewhat surprisingly, produce more accurate size estimates. We also estimated the sizes of 4 key populations at risk for human immunodeficiency virus infection in Rwanda. Our estimates were higher than earlier estimates from Rwanda but lower than international benchmarks. Finally, in this article we develop a new sensitivity analysis framework and use it to assess the possible biases in our estimates. Our design can be customized and extended for other settings, enabling researchers to continue to improve the network scale-up method.

The network scale-up method is a promising technique that uses sampled social network data to estimate the sizes of epidemiologically important hidden populations, such as sex workers and people who inject illicit drugs. Although previous scale-up research has focused exclusively on networks of acquaintances, we show that the type of personal network about which survey respondents are asked to report is a potentially crucial parameter that researchers are free to vary. This generalization leads to a method that is more flexible and potentially more accurate. In 2011, we conducted a large, nationally representative survey experiment in Rwanda that randomized respondents to report about one of 2 different personal networks. Our results showed that asking respondents for less information can, somewhat surprisingly, produce more accurate size estimates. We also estimated the sizes of 4 key populations at risk for human immunodeficiency virus infection in Rwanda. Our estimates were higher than earlier estimates from Rwanda but lower than international benchmarks. Finally, in this article we develop a new sensitivity analysis framework and use it to assess the possible biases in our estimates. Our design can be customized and extended for other settings, enabling researchers to continue to improve the network scale-up method.

Respondent-driven sampling (RDS) is a link-tracing procedure used in epidemiologic research on hidden or hard-to-reach populations in which subjects recruit others via their social networks. Estimates from RDS studies may have poor statistical properties due to statistical dependence in sampled subjects' traits. Two distinct mechanisms account for dependence in an RDS study: homophily, the tendency for individuals to share social ties with others exhibiting similar characteristics, and preferential recruitment, in which recruiters do not recruit uniformly at random from their network alters. The different effects of network homophily and preferential recruitment in RDS studies have been a source of confusion and controversy in methodological and empirical research in epidemiology. In this work, we gave formal definitions of homophily and preferential recruitment and showed that neither is identified in typical RDS studies. We derived nonparametric identification regions for homophily and preferential recruitment and showed that these parameters were not identified unless the network took a degenerate form. The results indicated that claims of homophily or recruitment bias measured from empirical RDS studies may not be credible. We applied our identification results to a study involving both a network census and RDS on a population of injection drug users in Hartford, Connecticut (2012-2013). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One of the many challenges hindering the global response to the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) epidemic is the difficulty of collecting reliable information about the populations most at risk for the disease. Thus, the authors empirically assessed a promising new method for estimating the sizes of most at-risk populations: the network scale-up method. Using 4 different data sources, 2 of which were from other researchers, the authors produced 5 estimates of the number of heavy drug users in Curitiba, Brazil. The authors found that the network scale-up and generalized network scale-up estimators produced estimates 5–10 times higher than estimates made using standard methods (the multiplier method and the direct estimation method using data from 2004 and 2010). Given that equally plausible methods produced such a wide range of results, the authors recommend that additional studies be undertaken to compare estimates based on the scale-up method with those made using other methods. If scale-up-based methods routinely produce higher estimates, this would suggest that scale-up-based methods are inappropriate for populations most at risk of HIV/AIDS or that standard methods may tend to underestimate the sizes of these populations. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]