Back to Search Start Over

More comprehensive reporting of methods in studies using respondent driven sampling is required: a systematic review of the uptake of the STROBE-RDS guidelines.

Authors :
Avery L
Rotondi M
Source :
Journal of clinical epidemiology [J Clin Epidemiol] 2020 Jan; Vol. 117, pp. 68-77. Date of Electronic Publication: 2019 Oct 04.
Publication Year :
2020

Abstract

Background: Respondent-driven sampling (RDS) is an increasingly popular method of recruiting participants from hard-to-reach populations and has traditionally been used to estimate the prevalence of HIV among marginalized people. The STROBE-RDS guidelines were published in 2015 to improve the reporting of these studies. We aim to determine the current applications of RDS and the quality of reporting of these studies.<br />Methods: The SCOPUS, PubMed, and CINAHL databases were used to find papers published in 2017, relating to RDS. Papers meeting the inclusion criteria of cross-sectional studies using RDS were classified according to the study outcome and target population. A random sample of 25 papers was selected to evaluate the quality of reporting using the STROBE-RDS guidelines.<br />Results: Men who have sex with men, people who inject drugs, and female sex workers were the most common populations for RDS studies; over half of the studies examined the HIV epidemic. Quality of reporting is good with respect to the original STROBE guidelines but is generally weaker with respect to RDS-specific aspects of the study, including recruitment and statistical analysis.<br />Conclusion: Most authors are using RDS appropriately and aware of the need for statistical adjustments to RDS data. Nonetheless, the STROBE-RDS guidelines should be more widely disseminated to promote better reporting of key aspects of RDS studies.<br /> (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1878-5921
Volume :
117
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
Journal of clinical epidemiology
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
31589951
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.09.024