Advertisement

Implementing Respondent-Driven Sampling to Recruit Women Who Exchange Sex in New York City: Factors Associated with Recruitment and Lessons Learned

  • Sidney A. CarrilloEmail author
  • Alexis V. Rivera
  • Sarah L. Braunstein
Original Paper
  • 75 Downloads

Abstract

Respondent-driven sampling (RDS) relies on productive peer recruitment to capture hidden populations. Domestic studies have identified characteristics of productive recruitment among RDS samples of men who have sex with men and persons who use drugs, but not of women who exchange sex, a group vulnerable to HIV infection. We examined sociodemographic-, behavioral-, exchange-sex-, and protocol-related factors associated with recruitment among seeds (n = 25) and peers (n = 297) in the 2016 New York City National HIV Behavioral Surveillance Study cycle focused on women who exchange sex. Recruiter productivity was significantly associated with not having been recently incarcerated, lower rate of HIV testing, and larger exchange sex networks among seeds, and with HIV-prevention services usage among peers. We describe challenges and lessons learned from implementing RDS in this population. Our study identifies seed characteristics and protocol improvements researchers can utilize when implementing future RDS studies among women who exchange sex.

Keywords

Respondent-driven sampling Recruitment Exchange sex HIV USA 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was made possible through the support of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [6NU62PS005086] National HIV Behavioral Surveillance (NHBS) system. We would like to thank our CDC colleagues, field staff, and study participants.

Funding

This study was funded by CDC (6NU62PS005086).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Supplementary material

10461_2019_2485_MOESM1_ESM.docx (16 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 17 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. HIV Surveillance Report, 2016. 2017.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    UNAIDS. Guidance Note on HIV and Sex Work. 2012.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nerlander LM, Hess KL, Rose CE, Sionean C, Thorson A, Broz D, et al. Exchange sex and HIV infection among women who inject drugs-20 US cities, 2009. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2017;75(3):S333–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Inciardi JA, Surratt HL, Kurtz SP. HIV, HBV, and HCV infections among drug-involved, inner-city, street sex workers in Miami, Florida. AIDS Behav. 2006;10(2):139–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jenness SM, Kobrak P, Wendel T, Neaigus A, Murrill CS, Hagan H. Patterns of exchange sex and HIV infection in high-risk heterosexual men and women. J Urban Health. 2011;88(2):329–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Abad N, Baack BN, O’Leary A, Mizuno Y, Herbst JH, Lyles CM. A systematic review of HIV and STI behavior change interventions for female sex workers in the United States. AIDS Behav. 2015;19(9):1701–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kral AH, Buthenthal RN, Lorvick J, Gee L, Bacchetti P, Edlin BR. Sexual transmission of HIV-1 among injection drug users in San Francisco, USA: risk-factor analysis. Lancet. 2001;357:1397–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kurtz SP, Surratt JA, Inciardi JA, Kiley MC. Sex work and “date” violence. Violence Against Women. 2004;10(4):357–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shannon K, Kerr T, Allinott S, Chettiar J, Shoveller J, Tyndall MW. Social and structural violence and power relations in mitigating HIV risk of drug-using women in survival sex work. Soc Sci Med. 2008;66(4):911–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dunkle KL, Wingood GM, Camp CM, DiClemente RJ. Economically motivated relationships and transactional sex among unmarried African American and white women: results from a U.S. national telephone survey. Public Health Rep. 2010;125(Suppl 4):90–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Miller CL, Fielden SJ, Tyndall MW, Zhang R, Gibson K, Shannon K. Individual and structural vulnerability among female youth who exchange sex for survival. J Adolesc Health. 2011;49(1):36–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Surratt HL, Inciardi JA. HIV risk, seropositivity and predictors of infection among homeless and non-homeless women sex workers in Miami, Florida, USA. AIDS Care. 2004;16(5):594–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shaver FM. Sex work research: methodological and ethical challenges. J Interpers Violence. 2005;20(3):296–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Paz-Bailey G, Noble M, Salo K, Tregear SJ. Prevalence of HIV among U.S. female sex workers: systematic review and meta-analysis. AIDS Behav. 2016;20(10):2318–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ramirez-Valles J, Heckathorn DD, Vazquez R, Diaz RM, Campbell RT. From networks to populations: the development and application of respondent-driven sampling among IDUs and Latino gay men. AIDS Behav. 2005;9(4):387–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Heckathorn DD. Respondent-driven sampling: a new approach to the study of hidden populations. Soc Probl. 1997;44(2):174–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Johnston LG, Hakim AJ, Dittrich S, Burnett J, Kim E, White RG. A systematic review of published respondent-driven sampling surveys collecting behavioral and biologic data. AIDS Behav. 2016;20(8):1754–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Montealegre JR, Johnston LG, Murrill C, Monterroso E. Respondent driven sampling for HIV biological and behavioral surveillance in Latin America and the Caribbean. AIDS Behav. 2013;17(7):2313–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Malekinejad M, Johnston LG, Kendall C, Kerr LR, Rifkin MR, Rutherford GW. Using respondent-driven sampling methodology for HIV biological and behavioral surveillance in international settings: a systematic review. AIDS Behav. 2008;12(4 Suppl):S105–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Heckathorn DD. Respondent-driven sampling II: deriving valid population estimates from chain referral samples of hidden populations. Soc Probl. 2002;49(1):11–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gile KJ, Johnston LG, Salganik MJ. Diagnostics for respondent-driven sampling. J R Stat Soc Ser A Stat Soc. 2014;178(1):241–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pitpitan EV, Kalichman SC, Eaton LA, Strathdee SA, Patterson TL. HIV/STI risk among venue-based female sex workers across the globe: a look back and the way forward. Curr HIV/AIDS Rep. 2013;10(1):65–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Uuskula A, Johnston LG, Raag M, Trummal A, Talu A, Des Jarlais DC. Evaluating recruitment among female sex workers and injecting drug users at risk for HIV using respondent-driven sampling in Estonia. J Urban Health. 2010;87(2):304–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Johnston LG, Sabin K, Mai TH, Pham TH. Assessment of respondent driven sampling for recruiting female sex workers in two Vietnamese cities: reaching the unseen sex worker. J Urban Health. 2006;83(6 Suppl):i16–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Simic M, Johnston LG, Platt L, Baros S, Andjelkovic V, Novotny T, et al. Exploring barriers to ‘respondent driven sampling’ in sex worker and drug-injecting sex worker populations in Eastern Europe. J Urban Health. 2006;83(6 Suppl):i6–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Montealegre JR, Risser JM, Selwyn BJ, McCurdy SA, Sabin K. Effectiveness of respondent driven sampling to recruit undocumented Central American immigrant women in Houston, Texas for an HIV behavioral survey. AIDS Behav. 2013;17(2):719–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Strathdee SA, Philbin MM, Semple SJ, Pu M, Orozovich P, Martinez G, et al. Correlates of injection drug use among female sex workers in two Mexico-U.S. border cities. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2008;92(1–3):132–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Abramovitz D, Volz EM, Strathdee SA, Patterson TL, Vera A, Frost SD, et al. Using respondent-driven sampling in a hidden population at risk of HIV infection: who do HIV-positive recruiters recruit? Sex Transm Dis. 2009;36(12):750–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Cornwell B, Schneider JA. Social venue range and referral chain impact: implications for the sampling of hidden communities. PLoS ONE. 2017;12(8):e0181494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Forrest JI, Lachowsky NJ, Lal A, Cui Z, Sereda P, Raymond HF, et al. Factors associated with productive recruiting in a respondent-driven sample of men who have sex with men in Vancouver, Canada. J Urban Health. 2016;93(2):379–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Lachowsky NJ, Sorge JT, Raymond HF, Cui Z, Sereda P, Rich A, et al. Does size really matter? A sensitivity analysis of number of seeds in a respondent-driven sampling study of gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men in Vancouver, Canada. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2016;16(1):157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Reisner SL, Mimiaga MJ, Johnson CV, Bland S, Case P, Safren SA, et al. What makes a respondent-driven sampling “seed” productive? Example of finding at-risk Massachusetts men who have sex with men. J Urban Health. 2010;87(3):467–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Rudolph AE, Gaines TL, Lozada R, Vera A, Brouwer KC. Evaluating outcome-correlated recruitment and geographic recruitment bias in a respondent-driven sample of people who inject drugs in Tijuana, Mexico. AIDS Behav. 2014;18(12):2325–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kuhns LM, Kwon S, Ryan DT, Garofalo R, Phillips G 2nd, Mustanski BS. Evaluation of respondent-driven sampling in a study of urban young men who have sex with men. J Urban Health. 2015;92(1):151–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Merli MG, Moody J, Smith J, Li J, Weir S, Chen X. Challenges to recruiting population representative samples of female sex workers in China using Respondent Driven Sampling. Soc Sci Med. 2015;125:79–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Okal J, Raymond HF, Tun W, Musyoki H, Dadabhai S, Broz D, et al. Lessons learned from respondent-driven sampling recruitment in Nairobi: experiences from the field. BMC Res Notes. 2016;9:158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Yamanis TJ, Merli MG, Neely WW, Tian FF, Moody J, Tu X, et al. An empirical analysis of the impact of recruitment patterns on RDS estimates among a socially ordered population of female sex workers in China. Sociol Methods Res. 2013;42(3):392–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Gallagher KM, Sullivan PS, Lansky A, Onorato IM. Behavioral surveillance among people at risk for HIV infection in the U.S.: the National HIV Behavioral Surveillance System. Public Health Rep. 2007;122(Suppl 1):32–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Truong HM, Grasso M, Chen YH, Kellogg TA, Robertson T, Curotto A, et al. Balancing theory and practice in respondent-driven sampling: a case study of innovations developed to overcome recruitment challenges. PLoS ONE. 2013;8(8):e70344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Parvez F, Katyal M, Alper H, Leibowitz R, Venters H. Female sex workers incarcerated in New York City jails: prevalence of sexually transmitted infections and associated risk behaviors. Sex Transm Infect. 2013;89(4):280–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Official Compilation of Codes, Rules and Regulations of the State of New York, Title 9 CRR-NY 8003.2.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Wylie JL, Jolly AM. Understanding recruitment: outcomes associated with alternate methods for seed selection in respondent driven sampling. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013;13:93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Daniulaityte R, Falck R, Li L, Nahhas RW, Carlson RG. Respondent-driven sampling to recruit young adult non-medical users of pharmaceutical opioids: problems and solutions. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2012;121(1–2):23–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.HIV Epidemiology and Field Services Program, Bureau of HIV/AIDS Prevention and ControlNew York City Department of Health and Mental HygieneNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations