Combining respondent-driven sampling with a community-based participatory action study of people who smoke drugs in two cities in British Columbia, Canada
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 11, 2025

Integrating Computerized Linguistic and Social Network Analyses to Capture Addiction Recovery Capital in an Online Community
Published on: May 31, 2019
Sulaf Elkhalifa1, Ehsan Jozaghi2, Samona Marsh3,4,5,6
1School of Public Health, Room 101, 600 Peter Morand Crescent, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, KIH 8M5, Canada.
Background:
The smoking of illicit drugs presents a serious social and economic burden in Canada. People who smoke drugs (PWSD) are at increased risk of contracting multiple infections through risky drug practices. Peer-led harm reduction activities, and the resulting social networks that form around them, can potentially minimize the dangers associated with the smoking illicit drugs.
Goal:
The goals of this study were to pilot test the combined approaches of respondent driven sampling with community based participatory action research in these settings and compare the attributes and social networks of PWSD in two British Columbia cities with different harm reduction programs.
Methods:
Using community-based participatory action research (CBPAR) and respondent-driven sampling (RDS), individuals with lived drug experiences were employed from communities in Abbotsford and Vancouver as peer researchers to interview ten contacts from their social networks. Contacts completed a questionnaire about their harm reduction behaviours and interactions.
Results:
We found that PWSD residing in Abbotsford were more likely to report engaging in harm-promoting behaviours, such as sharing, reusing, or borrowing crack pipes. However, PWSD in the Downtown East side Community of Vancouver were more likely to report engaging in harm-reducing activities, such as being trained in naloxone use and CPR. We found no differences in network sizes between the two communities, despite the population differences and harm reduction programs CONCLUSION: The high participation rates and interactions between researchers, and peer researchers enriched the study implementation and successfully informed our results. The fact that there were no differences in network size suggests that people have similar support in Vancouver as in Abbotsford, and that drug use practices differ mainly due to availability of harm reduction programming and resources.
More Related Videos
10:17High-throughput and Comprehensive Drug Surveillance Using Multisegment Injection-Capillary Electrophoresis-Mass Spectrometry
Published on: April 23, 2019
06:39Electroencephalographic, Heart Rate, and Galvanic Skin Response Assessment for an Advertising Perception Study: Application to Antismoking Public Service Announcements
Published on: August 28, 2017
Related Concept Videos
Sampling Plans
Random sampling is a method where each member of the population has an equal chance of being selected for the sample. It involves selecting individuals randomly, often using random number generators or lottery-type methods. For example, when analyzing the properties of a...
Stratified Sampling Method
To choose a stratified sample, divide the population into groups called strata and then take a...
Cluster Sampling Method
To choose a cluster sample, divide the population into clusters (groups) and then randomly select some of the clusters. All the members from these clusters are in the cluster sample. For example, if you randomly sample four departments from your...
Combined Effects of Drugs: Synergism
Such synergistic combinations...
Community Based Intervention
Foundations of Community Mental Health Programs
Central to the success of community-based interventions is the...
Convenience Sampling Method
Convenience sampling is a non-random method of sample selection; this method selects individuals that are easily accessible and may result in biased data. For example, a marketing...