Journal of Aging and Health

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

The Diabetes Educator

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (2)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Feild, L.
Right arrow Articles by Levinsky, N. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Feild, L.
Right arrow Articles by Levinsky, N. G.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Journal of Aging and Health, Vol. 18, No. 4, 565-583 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/0898264306291420

Using Probability vs. Nonprobability Sampling to Identify Hard-to-Access Participants for Health-Related Research

Costs and Contrasts

Lucy Feild

Partners Health Care System, Boston, MA

Rachel A. Pruchno

University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, Stratford, NJ

Jennifer Bewley

Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA

Edward P. Lemay, Jr.

Yale University, New Haven, CT

Norman G. Levinsky

Boston University Medical School

This article compares the recruitment costs and participant characteristics associated with the use of probability and nonprobability sampling strategies in a longitudinal study of older hemodialysis patients and their spouses. Contrasts were made of people who accrued to the study based on probability and nonprobability sampling strategies. Probability-based sampling was more time-efficient and cost-effective than nonprobability sampling. There were no significant differences between the respondents identified through probability and nonprobability sampling on age, gender, years married, education, work status, and professional job status. Respondents from the probability sample were more likely to be Protestant and less likely to be Catholic than those from the nonprobability sample. Respondents from the probability sample were more likely to be Black, whereas those from the nonprobability sample were more likely to be White. There are strengths and shortcomings associated with both nonprobability and probability sampling. Researchers need to consider representativeness and external validity issues when designing sampling and related recruitment plans for health-related research.

Key Words: sampling • patient selection • recruitment strategies • hemodialysis


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J. Gerontol. B Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci.Home page
R. A. Pruchno, M. J. Rovine, F. Cartwright, and M. Wilson-Genderson
Stability and Change in Patient Preferences and Spouse Substituted Judgments Regarding Dialysis Continuation
J. Gerontol. B. Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci., March 1, 2008; 63(2): S81 - S91.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]