Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42128026›Full record

ReviewEpidemiology and health2026

The evolution of sampling in epidemiology: from classical probability models to AI-enhanced recruitment and active learning.

Sulaiman Abubakar Musa

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Epidemiology and health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Sulaiman Abubakar MusaDepartment of Planning, Research and Statistics, Federal Neuropsychiatric Hospital, Kano, Nigeria. sulebah002@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sampling is a foundational element of epidemiological research because it determines the validity, efficiency, and generalizability of population-based inferences. Classical probability and non-probability sampling methods have long underpinned public health study design by providing robust frameworks for unbiased estimation and causal inference. However, the rapid expansion of digital health data, electronic health records, and large-scale online cohorts has exposed important limitations in these largely static sampling frameworks. This narrative review traces the evolution of sampling in epidemiology from traditional probability-based designs to contemporary artificial intelligence-enhanced recruitment strategies, with particular emphasis on active learning and adaptive sampling. By synthesizing classical statistical theory with emerging machine-learning approaches and recent methodological advances, this review argues that the future of epidemiological sampling lies in hybrid frameworks that preserve statistical rigor while leveraging algorithm-driven adaptability. Methodological opportunities, ethical risks, and implications for low-income and middle-income countries are critically examined.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceModels, StatisticalPatient SelectionHumansProbabilityActive learningAlgorithmic biasArtificial intelligenceEpidemiologySampling theory

Identifiers

PMID42128026
PMCPMC13503061

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.