Respondent-Driven Sampling for Estimation of the Cumulative Lifetime Incidence of Abortion in Soweto, Johannesburg, South Africa: A Methodological Assessment
Abstract Respondent-driven sampling (RDS) is a potential strategy for addressing challenges in accurate estimation of abortion incidence, but it relies on often untested assumptions. We conducted an RDS study to estimate the cumulative lifetime incidence of abortion in Soweto, Johannesburg, South Af...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | American journal of epidemiology 2023-07, Vol.192 (7), p.1081-1092 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Abstract
Respondent-driven sampling (RDS) is a potential strategy for addressing challenges in accurate estimation of abortion incidence, but it relies on often untested assumptions. We conducted an RDS study to estimate the cumulative lifetime incidence of abortion in Soweto, Johannesburg, South Africa (April–December 2018), to evaluate whether RDS assumptions were met, and to compare RDS estimates of incidence with estimates adjusted for employment and age based on census data. A total of 849 participants were recruited from 11 seed participants between April and December 2018. The assumption that individuals can identify target population members and the assumption of approximation of sampling with replacement was met. There were minor violations of the assumptions of seed independence from the final sample and reciprocity of ties. Assumptions of accurate degree reporting and random recruitment were not met. Failure to meet assumptions yielded a study sample with different employment characteristics than those of the target population; this could not be resolved by standard RDS methods. The RDS estimate of cumulative lifetime abortion incidence was 12.1% (95% confidence interval: 9.8, 14.3), and the employment-adjusted estimate was 16.9% (95% confidence interval: 12.8, 22.1). We caution researchers in using RDS for representative estimates of abortion incidence. Use of postsurvey weights to adjust for differences in characteristics between the sample and the target population may yield more representative results. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0002-9262 1476-6256 |
DOI: | 10.1093/aje/kwad074 |