General population (methods)Archived
In the general population and in young people, surveys are generally conducted using representative samples of these populations. The first table presents different types of sample construction.
A discussion of the advantages and disavantages of different modes of administration of the questionnaires in general population and youth surveys can be found in the second table.
Table 1. Selected features of available methods for collecting behavioural data among the general population and youth: Sample construction
Design | Advantages | Disadvantages | Indications | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Probability sampling | Random sampling(1) |
|
Sampling frame maybe incomplete, out-of-date, etc |
|
Random location |
|
|||
Random digit dialing (phone) |
|
|
Common method today |
|
Representative sampling | Quota sampling |
Provides population pseudo-estimates through survey balancing, weighting, etc. |
|
Common method today |
Purposive or convenience sampling | Convenience sample in venues, etc. | May be only way to reach target population |
|
When no other solution is available (e.g. drop-out youth) |
References
(a) Groves, Robert M., F.J. Fowler, Mick P. Couper, James M. Lepkowski, Eleanor Singer, and R. Tourangeau. 2004. Survey Methodology. New York: Wiley.
Notes
(1) May be any type of simple or complex random sampling (multi-stage, etc.), including schools and/or classes as clusters for youth
Table 2. Selected features of available methods for collecting behavioural data among the general population and youth: Mode of administration
Mode | Advantages | Disadvantages | Comments |
---|---|---|---|
Telephone interview |
|
|
Most common method today |
Face-to-face personal interview |
|
|
|
Paper questionnaire mailed by post |
|
Most difficult to achieve good participation rate | |
Emailed questionnaire |
|
Difficult to achieve good participation rate | |
Internet-based questionnaire |
|
Difficult to achieve good participation rate | |
Paper questionnaire in situ (e.g. school, workplace) |
|
Youth: most common method today | |
CASI, CAPI (1) | Allows for complex question flow | ||
Mixed modes |
|
Notes
(1) CASI: Computer-assisted self interview. CAPI: Computer-assisted personal interview
Behavioural surveillance can be conducted in different methodological contexts. These contexts are discussed in the table below with their advantages and diadvantages. References of articles presenting examples of « good practice » are given.
Table. 3 Selected features of available methods for collecting data monitoring the general population and youth: Context of data collection process
Context | Advantages | Disadvantages | Comments |
---|---|---|---|
In-depth Sex Survey (a) |
|
|
Appropriate in early stages of the monitoring process |
Specific KABP survey (b) | Provides indicator data | Appropriate for frequent monitoring | |
Transportable module in e.g. General Health Survey (c) (or Health barometers) |
|
|
|
Transportable module in omnibus survey (d) |
|
Context may threaten validity | Appropriate for frequent monitoring |
Youth: module in general school survey (e.g. HBSC) (e) |
|
|
|
Mixed contexts |
Flexible
|
Examples
(a) A.Johnson, C.Mercer, B.Erens, A.Copas, S.McManus, K.Wellings, K.Fenton, C.Korovessis, W.Macdowall, K.Nanchahal. Sexual behaviour in Britain: partnerships, practices, and HIV risk behaviours. The Lancet, 2001 Dec 1;358(9296):1835-42.
(b) Grémy I, Beltzer N. HIV risk and condom use in the adult heterosexual population in France between 1992 and 2001: return to the starting point? AIDS. 2004 Mar 26;18(5):805-9.
(c) Robertson BJ. Sexual behaviour and risk of exposure to HIV among 18-25-year-olds in Scotland: assessing change 1988-1993. AIDS 1995;9(3):285-92
(d) Lader D. Contraception and sexual health 2006/07: a report on research using the National Statistics Omnibus Survey produced on behalf of the Information Centre for Health and Social Care. Newport: Office for National Statistics; 2007.
(e) see www.hbsc.org.