Escuela de Medicina, Universidad de Santiago de Chile, Santiago, Chile. ORCID: 0000-0002-5411-4498.
Investigadora independiente, Santiago, Chile. Email:
Medwave. 2022 Jan 3;21(1):e8513. doi: 10.5867/medwave.2022.01.002528.
This article summarizes the main elements, advantages, and disadvantages of Respondent-driven Sampling (RDS). Some criticisms regarding the feasibility of the inherent assumptions, their point estimators, and the obtained variances are pointed out. This article also comments on the problems observed in the quality of reports. Surveys using RDS should be methodologically sound as they are being applied to define priorities in health programs and develop national and international policies for financing service delivery, among other uses. However, there is considerable potential for bias related to implementation and analytical errors. There is limited empirical evidence on how representative the results obtained by RDS are, and the quest to improve the methodology is still in progress. Nevertheless, to have confidence in RDS results, we must verify that the social structure of the networks conforms to the assumptions required by the theory, that the sampling assumptions are reasonably fulfilled, and that the quality of the report is optimal, particularly for methodological and analytical items.
本文总结了回应驱动抽样(RDS)的主要要素、优点和缺点。本文还指出了对固有假设、其点估计值和获得的方差的可行性的一些批评意见。本文还评论了在报告质量方面观察到的问题。由于 RDS 被用于确定卫生计划的优先事项以及制定国家和国际服务提供融资政策等用途,因此使用 RDS 的调查应该具有良好的方法学基础。然而,与实施和分析错误相关的偏倚存在相当大的可能性。关于 RDS 获得的结果的代表性的实证证据有限,改进方法的探索仍在进行中。然而,要对 RDS 结果有信心,我们必须验证网络的社会结构是否符合理论要求的假设,抽样假设是否得到合理满足,以及报告的质量是否最优,特别是对于方法学和分析项目。