Incorporating respondent-driven sampling into web-based discrete choice experiments: preferences for COVID-19 mitigation measures

Abstract

To slow the spread of COVID-19, most countries implemented stay-at-home orders, social distancing, and other nonpharmaceutical mitigation strategies. To understand individual preferences for mitigation strategies, we piloted a web-based Respondent Driven Sampling (RDS) approach to recruit participants from four universities in three countries to complete a computer-based Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE). Use of these methods, in combination, can serve to increase the external validity of a study by enabling recruitment of populations underrepresented in sampling frames, thus allowing preference results to be more generalizable to targeted subpopulations. A total of 99 students or staff members were invited to complete the survey, of which 72% started the survey (n = 71). Sixty-three participants (89% of starters) completed all tasks in the DCE. A rank-ordered mixed logit model was used to estimate preferences for COVID-19 nonpharmaceutical mitigation strategies. The model estimates indicated that participants preferred mitigation strategies that resulted in lower COVID-19 risk (i.e. sheltering-in-place more days a week), financial compensation from the government, fewer health (mental and physical) problems, and fewer financial problems. The high response rate and survey engagement provide proof of concept that RDS and DCE can be implemented as web-based applications, with the potential for scale up to produce nationally-representative preference estimates.

What is the effectiveness of financial support schemes for individuals requested to self-isolate following a positive Covid test or positive contact: A rapid review

“…We identified a further four studies published after the review searches were undertaken (Albani et al 2021, Bourdeaux et al 2021, Homaie Rad et al 2021, Johnson et al 2022). Alongside the five studies identified from reviews, a total of nine primary studies are included in this report.…”

“…Johnson et al (2022) and Homaie Rad et al (2021) undertook discrete choice experiments (DCEs) to elicit public preferences regarding COVID-19 in the United States of America and Iran, respectively. Johnson et al (2022) undertook their DCE across universities in the USA, Mexico and Kenya to try to represent an income spread in their findings. Respondents reported a preference to receive financial government compensation during the pandemic.…”

“…The hypothesised causal pathway between the implementation of financial support for isolation and a reduction in COVID-19 cases is well documented, however, the extent to which the components interact is uncertain. There is evidence suggesting individuals are more likely to comply with isolation when they are financially supported to do so (Albani et al 2021, Bodas & Peleg 2020, Homaie Rad et al 2021, Johnson et al 2022, Kavanagh et al 2012, Pichler et al 2020). Evidence suggesting a positive relationship with longer isolation duration and higher financial requirements (Homaie Rad et al 2021).…”

“…We identified a further four studies published after the review searches were undertaken (Albani et al 2021, Bourdeaux et al 2021, Homaie Rad et al 2021, Johnson et al 2022.…”

Employing Respondent Driven Sampling (RDS) to recruit people who inject drugs (PWID) and other hard-to-reach populations during COVID-19: Lessons learned

“…While the evidence for the employment of RDS to recruit PWID or HIV+ groups during the pandemic is lacking, there is increasing evidence of successful use of RDS to recruit hard-to-reach populations beyond those described in this study. For example, Jonhson et al resorted to RDS to recruit a sample of isolated college students in China to document their views on mitigation measures ( 37 ). Another study by Mukhergee et al explored patterns of media consumption during a COVID-19 lockdown in India using a large RDS-recruited sample ( 38 ).…”