Shapiro M F, Berk M L, Berry S H, Emmons C A, Athey L A, Hsia D C, Leibowitz A A, Maida C A, Marcus M, Perlman J F, Schur C L, Schuster M A, Senterfitt J W, Bozzette S A
Department of Medicine, The University of California, Los Angeles, USA.
Health Serv Res. 1999 Dec;34(5 Pt 1):951-68.
To examine the trade-offs inherent in selecting a sample design for a national study of care for an uncommon disease, and the adaptations, opportunities and costs associated with the choice of national probability sampling in a study of HIV/AIDS.
A consortium of public and private funders, research organizations, community advocates, and local providers assembled to design and execute the study.
Data collected by providers or collected for administrative purposes are limited by selectivity and concerns about validity. In studies based on convenience sampling, generalizability is uncertain. Multistage probability sampling through households may not produce sufficient cases of diseases that are not highly prevalent. In such cases, an attractive alternative design is multistage probability sampling through sites of care, in which all persons in the reference population have some chance of random selection through their medical providers, and in which included subjects are selected with known probability. DATA COLLECTION AND PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Multistage national probability sampling through providers supplies uniquely valuable information, but will not represent populations not receiving medical care and may not provide sufficient cases in subpopulations of interest. Factors contributing to the substantial cost of such a design include the need to develop a sampling frame, the problems associated with recruitment of providers and subjects through medical providers, the need for buy-in from persons affected by the disease and their medical practitioners, as well as the need for a high participation rate. Broad representation from the national community of scholars with relevant expertise is desirable. Special problems are associated with organization of the research effort, with instrument development, and with data analysis and dissemination in such a consortium.
Multistage probability sampling through providers can provide unbiased, nationally representative data on persons receiving regular medical care for uncommon diseases and can improve our ability to accurately study care and its outcomes for diseases such as HIV/AIDS. However, substantial costs and special circumstances are associated with the implementation of such efforts.
探讨为一项针对罕见病的全国性护理研究选择样本设计时所固有的权衡取舍,以及在一项关于艾滋病毒/艾滋病的研究中选择全国概率抽样所涉及的调整、机遇和成本。
由公共和私人资助者、研究组织、社区倡导者及当地提供者组成的一个联盟共同设计并开展此项研究。
由提供者收集或为行政目的收集的数据受选择性和有效性问题的限制。在基于便利抽样的研究中,普遍性不确定。通过家庭进行的多阶段概率抽样可能无法产生足够数量的非高度流行疾病病例。在这种情况下,一种有吸引力的替代设计是通过护理场所进行多阶段概率抽样,在这种抽样中,参考人群中的所有人都有一定机会通过其医疗提供者被随机选中,而且入选对象是以已知概率被选中的。
通过提供者进行的多阶段全国概率抽样提供了独特且有价值的信息,但无法代表未接受医疗护理的人群,并且可能无法在感兴趣的亚人群中提供足够数量的病例。导致这种设计成本高昂的因素包括需要建立一个抽样框架、通过医疗提供者招募提供者和受试者所涉及的问题、需要受疾病影响者及其医生的支持,以及需要高参与率。希望有来自具有相关专业知识的全国学者群体的广泛代表性。在这样一个联盟中,研究工作的组织、工具开发以及数据分析和传播都存在特殊问题。
通过提供者进行的多阶段概率抽样可以为接受罕见病常规医疗护理的人群提供无偏差的、具有全国代表性的数据,并可以提高我们准确研究护理及其对艾滋病毒/艾滋病等疾病的结果的能力。然而,实施此类研究工作会涉及高昂成本和特殊情况。