The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Hepatitis C bio-behavioural surveys in people who inject drugs-a systematic review of sensitivity to the theoretical assumptions of respondent driven sampling

Hepatitis C bio-behavioural surveys in people who inject drugs-a systematic review of sensitivity to the theoretical assumptions of respondent driven sampling
Hepatitis C bio-behavioural surveys in people who inject drugs-a systematic review of sensitivity to the theoretical assumptions of respondent driven sampling
Background
New, more effective and better-tolerated therapies for hepatitis C (HCV) have made the elimination of HCV a feasible objective. However, for this to be achieved, it is necessary to have a detailed understanding of HCV epidemiology in people who inject drugs (PWID).

Respondent-driven sampling (RDS) can provide prevalence estimates in hidden populations such as PWID. The aims of this systematic review are to identify published studies that use RDS in PWID to measure the prevalence of HCV, and compare each study against the STROBE-RDS checklist to assess their sensitivity to the theoretical assumptions underlying RDS.

Method
Searches were undertaken in accordance with PRISMA systematic review guidelines. Included studies were English language publications in peer-reviewed journals, which reported the use of RDS to recruit PWID to an HCV bio-behavioural survey. Data was extracted under three headings: (1) survey overview, (2) survey outcomes, and (3) reporting against selected STROBE-RDS criteria.

Results
Thirty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. They varied in scale (range 1–15 survey sites) and the sample sizes achieved (range 81–1000 per survey site) but were consistent in describing the use of standard RDS methods including: seeds, coupons and recruitment incentives.

Twenty-seven studies (87%) either calculated or reported the intention to calculate population prevalence estimates for HCV and two used RDS data to calculate the total population size of PWID. Detailed operational and analytical procedures and reporting against selected criteria from the STROBE-RDS checklist varied between studies. There were widespread indications that sampling did not meet the assumptions underlying RDS, which led to two studies being unable to report an estimated HCV population prevalence in at least one survey location.

Conclusion
RDS can be used to estimate a population prevalence of HCV in PWID and estimate the PWID population size. Accordingly, as a single instrument, it is a useful tool for guiding HCV elimination. However, future studies should report the operational conduct of each survey in accordance with the STROBE-RDS checklist to indicate sensitivity to the theoretical assumptions underlying the method.

Systematic review registration
PROSPERO CRD42015019245
Buchanan, Ryan
9499f713-f684-4046-be29-83cd9d6f834d
Khakoo, Salim
6c16d2f5-ae80-4d9b-9100-6bfb34ad0273
Coad, Jonathan
37e53b9b-c1ae-4623-9d45-ce7e4b9a5125
Grellier, Leonie
5b353bf7-3bab-4510-8195-d5c9433b9f01
Parkes, Julie
59dc6de3-4018-415e-bb99-13552f97e984
Buchanan, Ryan
9499f713-f684-4046-be29-83cd9d6f834d
Khakoo, Salim
6c16d2f5-ae80-4d9b-9100-6bfb34ad0273
Coad, Jonathan
37e53b9b-c1ae-4623-9d45-ce7e4b9a5125
Grellier, Leonie
5b353bf7-3bab-4510-8195-d5c9433b9f01
Parkes, Julie
59dc6de3-4018-415e-bb99-13552f97e984

Buchanan, Ryan, Khakoo, Salim, Coad, Jonathan, Grellier, Leonie and Parkes, Julie (2017) Hepatitis C bio-behavioural surveys in people who inject drugs-a systematic review of sensitivity to the theoretical assumptions of respondent driven sampling. Harm Reduction Journal, 14 (44). (doi:10.1186/s12954-017-0172-z).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Background
New, more effective and better-tolerated therapies for hepatitis C (HCV) have made the elimination of HCV a feasible objective. However, for this to be achieved, it is necessary to have a detailed understanding of HCV epidemiology in people who inject drugs (PWID).

Respondent-driven sampling (RDS) can provide prevalence estimates in hidden populations such as PWID. The aims of this systematic review are to identify published studies that use RDS in PWID to measure the prevalence of HCV, and compare each study against the STROBE-RDS checklist to assess their sensitivity to the theoretical assumptions underlying RDS.

Method
Searches were undertaken in accordance with PRISMA systematic review guidelines. Included studies were English language publications in peer-reviewed journals, which reported the use of RDS to recruit PWID to an HCV bio-behavioural survey. Data was extracted under three headings: (1) survey overview, (2) survey outcomes, and (3) reporting against selected STROBE-RDS criteria.

Results
Thirty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. They varied in scale (range 1–15 survey sites) and the sample sizes achieved (range 81–1000 per survey site) but were consistent in describing the use of standard RDS methods including: seeds, coupons and recruitment incentives.

Twenty-seven studies (87%) either calculated or reported the intention to calculate population prevalence estimates for HCV and two used RDS data to calculate the total population size of PWID. Detailed operational and analytical procedures and reporting against selected criteria from the STROBE-RDS checklist varied between studies. There were widespread indications that sampling did not meet the assumptions underlying RDS, which led to two studies being unable to report an estimated HCV population prevalence in at least one survey location.

Conclusion
RDS can be used to estimate a population prevalence of HCV in PWID and estimate the PWID population size. Accordingly, as a single instrument, it is a useful tool for guiding HCV elimination. However, future studies should report the operational conduct of each survey in accordance with the STROBE-RDS checklist to indicate sensitivity to the theoretical assumptions underlying the method.

Systematic review registration
PROSPERO CRD42015019245

Text
s12954-017-0172-z - Version of Record
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
Download (712kB)

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 25 June 2017
Published date: 11 July 2017

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 429200
URI: https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/429200
PURE UUID: ebbb36d9-be43-4574-b0d3-d9c731d88b64

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 22 Mar 2019 17:30
Last modified: 22 Mar 2019 17:30

Export record

Altmetrics

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×