The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Convenience sampling
Abstract
Researchers assessed the efficacy, acceptability, and safety of a topical alkane vapocoolant spray in reducing pain during intravenous cannulation in adults. A randomised double blind placebo controlled trial study design was used. The intervention was a blend of propane, butane, and pentane, which was sprayed less than 15 seconds before cannulation on to the relevant area of skin from a distance of 12 cm for two seconds. The control treatment was a water spray. The primary outcomemeasure was pain during cannulation, measured with a 100 mm visual analogue scale. Secondary outcome measures included discomfort during administration of the spray, success rate of cannulation, and side effects of treatment. Participants were adults who required intravenous cannulation in the emergency department of ametropolitan teaching hospital. In total, 201 adult patients were recruited using convenience sampling. The intervention group consisted of 109 (54%) men, who had a mean (standard deviation) age of 58.2 (19.5) years. The researchers concluded that topical alkane vapocoolant spray was effective, acceptable, and safe in reducing pain during peripheral intravenous cannulation in adults in the emergency department. Which of the following statements, if any, are true? a) Convenience sampling constitutes probability 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
Cited by
Lau, J., Lim, T.-Z., Jianlin Wong, G., & Tan, K.-K. (2020) · Preventive Medicine Reports · doi:10.1016/j.pmedr.2020.101223 · Cited by 154
Waluyo, B., & Kusumastuti, S. (2024) · Social Sciences & Humanities Open · doi:10.1016/j.ssaho.2024.101146 · Cited by 49
Evaluating technology integration in education: a framework for professional development
Siyam, Y., Siyam, N., Hussain, M., & Alqaryouti, O. (2025) · Discover Education · doi:10.1007/s44217-025-00448-z · Cited by 34
Anjum, N., Rahaman, M. S., Choudhury, M. I., & Rahman, M. M. (2022) · Journal of Business Strategy Finance and Management · doi:10.12944/jbsfm.04.01.06 · Cited by 12
“It’s Just a Wild, Wild West”: Harnessing Public Procurement as an AI Governance Mechanism
Hudig, A. I., Kallina, E., & Singh, J. (2026) · Proceedings of the 2026 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3772318.3791968 · Cited by 3
“We recruited our participants via convenience and snowball sampling [133, 146], harnessing the networks of the lead researchers who have previous professional touchpoints with the public sector and procurement.”
Metadata
- Authors
- Sedgwick, P.
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2013-10-25
- Volume
- 347
- Issue
- oct25 2
- Pages
- f6304-f6304
- ISSN
- 1756-1833 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4241509314
- Cited by
- 284
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 3.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
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.