Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
School of Public Health, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ, USA.
J Urban Health. 2024 Aug;101(4):856-866. doi: 10.1007/s11524-024-00880-w. Epub 2024 May 24.
Due to stigma or legal issues, populations with higher HIV risk are often hard to reach, which impedes accurate population estimation of HIV burden. To better sample hard-to-reach populations (HTRPs) for HIV surveillance, various sampling methods have been designed and/or used since HIV epidemic following the first reported AIDS cases in 1981. This paper describes the development and the assessment (i.e., validity and reproducibility) of approximately eight sampling methods (e.g., convenience sampling, snowball sampling, time location sampling, and respondent-driven sampling) for HTRPs in HIV surveillance, with a focus on respondent-driven sampling (RDS). Compared to other methods, RDS has been greatly assessed. However, current evidence is still inadequate for RDS to be considered the best option for sampling HTRPs. The field must continue to assess RDS and to develop new sampling approaches or modifications to existing approaches.
由于污名化或法律问题,高艾滋病毒风险人群往往难以接触,这阻碍了对艾滋病毒负担的准确人群估计。为了更好地为艾滋病毒监测抽取难以接触的人群(HTRP),自 1981 年首例艾滋病病例报告以来,已经设计和/或使用了各种抽样方法。本文描述了大约八种抽样方法(例如,便利抽样、滚雪球抽样、时间地点抽样和应答者驱动抽样)在艾滋病毒监测中针对 HTRP 的开发和评估(即有效性和再现性),重点是应答者驱动抽样(RDS)。与其他方法相比,RDS 得到了极大的评估。然而,目前的证据仍然不足以认为 RDS 是抽取 HTRP 的最佳选择。该领域必须继续评估 RDS,并开发新的抽样方法或对现有方法进行修改。