Impact of Two Different Recruitment Procedures (Random vs. Volunteer Selection) on the Results of Seroepidemiological Study (SARS-CoV-2)

Maksymilian Gajda, Małgorzata Kowalska and Jan Eugeniusz Zejda
Additional contact information
Maksymilian Gajda: Department of Epidemiology, Faculty of Medical Sciences in Katowice, Medical University of Silesia, 40-752 Katowice, Poland
Małgorzata Kowalska: Department of Epidemiology, Faculty of Medical Sciences in Katowice, Medical University of Silesia, 40-752 Katowice, Poland
Jan Eugeniusz Zejda: Department of Epidemiology, Faculty of Medical Sciences in Katowice, Medical University of Silesia, 40-752 Katowice, Poland

IJERPH, 2021, vol. 18, issue 18, 1-9

Abstract: The proper recruitment of subjects for population-based epidemiological studies is critical to the external validity of the studies and, above all, to the sound and correct interpretation of the findings. Since 2020, the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has been a new factor that has been, additionally, hindering studies. Therefore, the aim of our study is to compare demographic, socio-economic, health-related characteristics and the frequency of SARS-CoV-2 infection occurrence among the randomly selected group and the group composed of volunteers. We compare two groups of participants from the cross-sectional study assessing the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus, which was conducted in autumn 2020, in three cities of the Silesian Voivodeship in Poland. The first group consisted of a randomly selected, nationally representative, age-stratified sample of subjects (1167 participants, “RG” group) and was recruited using personal invitation letters and postal addresses obtained from a national registry. The second group (4321 volunteers, “VG” group) included those who expressed their willingness to participate in response to an advertisement published in the media. Compared with RG subjects, volunteers were more often females, younger and professionally active, more often had a history of contact with a COVID-19 patient, post-contact nasopharyngeal swab, fewer comorbidities, as well as declared the occurrence of symptoms that might suggest infection with SARS-CoV-2. Additionally, in the VG group the percentage of positive IgG results and tuberculosis vaccination were higher. The findings of the study confirm that surveys limited to volunteers are biased. The presence of the bias may seriously affect and distort inference and make the generalizability of the results more than questionable. Although effective control over selection bias in surveys, including volunteers, is virtually impossible, its impact on the survey results is impossible to predict. However, whenever possible, such surveys could include a small component of a random sample to assess the presence and potential effects of selection bias.

Keywords: SARS-CoV-2; seroepidemiological study; recruitment; randomization; self-selection (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/18/9928/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/18/9928/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:18:p:9928-:d:639978

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().