Abstract

AbstractA number of multi‐variate etiological surveys are analyzed for recurrent sources of bias in balanced and purposive sampling designs. Three nonsampling components emerge that may dominate the total error of a sample survey estimate. Outstanding among these appear to be administrative consideration of cost and convenience which may actually determine a sampling procedure, especially by reliance on voluntary participation, proxy responses and case‐finding methods that restrict the sample. Next is lack of comparability of population series that differ on some initial state (as to smoking). Finally, errors are caused by strong beliefs in what results should be. Extensive experience has now shown that it may not be possible to conduct a satisfactory etiological inquiry by use of surveys using nonrandom population samples.

Full Text

Published Version

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.