The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Variance Estimation, Design Effects, and Sample Size Calculations for Respondent-Driven Sampling
Open accessAbstract
Hidden populations, such as injection drug users and sex workers, are central to a number of public health problems. However, because of the nature of these groups, it is difficult to collect accurate information about them, and this difficulty complicates disease prevention efforts. A recently developed statistical approach called respondent-driven sampling improves our ability to study hidden populations by allowing researchers to make unbiased estimates of the prevalence of certain traits in these populations. Yet, not enough is known about the sample-to-sample variability of these prevalence estimates. In this paper, we present a bootstrap method for constructing confidence intervals around respondent-driven sampling estimates and demonstrate in simulations that it outperforms the naive method currently in use. We also use simulations and real data to estimate the design effects for respondent-driven sampling in a number of situations. We conclude with practical advice about the power calculations that are needed to determine the appropriate sample size for a study using respondent-driven sampling. In general, we recommend a sample size twice as large as would be needed under simple random sampling.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Gelman, A., Carlin, J. B., Stern, H. S., & Rubin, D. B. (2003) · doi:10.1201/9780429258480 · Cited by 27,276
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences
Cohen, J. (2013) · doi:10.4324/9780203771587 · Cited by 25,373
Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions
Fleiss, J. L., Levin, B., & Paik, M. C. (2003) · Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics · doi:10.1002/0471445428 · Cited by 18,646
Cited by
Sadler, G. R., Lee, H.-C., Lim, R. S.-H., & Fullerton, J. (2010) · Nursing & Health Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1442-2018.2010.00541.x · Cited by 1,257
Comment: Snowball versus Respondent-Driven Sampling
Heckathorn, D. D. (2011) · Sociological Methodology · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9531.2011.01244.x · Cited by 930
Malekinejad, M., Johnston, L. G., Kendall, C., Kerr, L. R. F. S., Rifkin, M. R., & Rutherford, G. W. (2008) · AIDS and Behavior · doi:10.1007/s10461-008-9421-1 · Cited by 433
Sampling Hard-to-Reach Populations with Respondent Driven Sampling
Johnston, L. G., & Sabin, K. (2010) · Methodological Innovations Online · doi:10.4256/mio.2010.0017 · Cited by 331
Network Sampling: From Snowball and Multiplicity to Respondent-Driven Sampling
Heckathorn, D. D., & Cameron, C. J. (2017) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev-soc-060116-053556 · Cited by 307
Metadata
- Authors
- Salganik, M. J.
- Venue
- Journal of Urban Health
- Published
- 2006-08-26
- Volume
- 83
- Issue
- S1
- Pages
- i98-112
- ISSN
- 0028-7091 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-3460
- 1468-2869
- OpenAlex
- W2060008194
- Cited by
- 424
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 7.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Variance Estimation, Design Effects, and Sample Size Calculations for Respondent-Driven Sampling. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s11524-006-9106-x
- The paper
- Salganik, M. J. (2006). Variance Estimation, Design Effects, and Sample Size Calculations for Respondent-Driven Sampling. Journal of Urban Health. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-006-9106-x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.