Table 1Participant counts by sample source

Sample sourceInvitations sentResponses receivedAnalytic sampleDates data received
First ABS Sample
  Mail 1.0 5,0001,2800a8/18/16–9/29/16
  Mail-to-Web1,860b1,0461,0468/18/16–9/29/16
Second ABS Sample
  Mail 1.14,1498228225/22/17–6/14/17
Social Media Samples
  SM 1.0N/A9,7783,4088/18/16–9/29/16
  SM 2.0N/A2,1791,37112/30/16–4/29/17
a

A key variable was missing from the Mail 1.0 sample, so the returned paper surveys were discarded, yielding an analytic sample of 0.

b

The 1,860 households that were sent Mail-to-Web instructions (and the 1,046 who responded) were part of the original sample of 5,000 households from the first ABS sample.

From: Modeling the Probability of Fraud in Social Media in a National Cannabis Survey

Cover of Modeling the Probability of Fraud in Social Media in a National Cannabis Survey
Modeling the Probability of Fraud in Social Media in a National Cannabis Survey [Internet].
Dutra LM, Farrelly MC, Bradfield B, et al.
Research Triangle Park (NC): RTI Press; 2021 Sep.
© 2021 Research Triangle Institute. All rights reserved.

This work is distributed under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 license (CC BY-NC-ND), a copy of which is available at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.