SELECTION OF CONTROLS FOR HOSPITAL-BASED CASE-CONTROL STUDIES USING RETROSPECTIVE DATA ON THE GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION OF CASES AND CONTROLS

Epidemiology ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. S153-S154 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tony Fletcher ◽  
Giovanni Leonardi ◽  
Kvetoslava Koppova ◽  
Rupert Hough ◽  
Peter Rudnai ◽  
...  
Epidemiology ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. S213 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giovanni Leonardi ◽  
Tony Fletcher ◽  
Kvetoslava Koppova ◽  
Rupert Hough ◽  
Peter Rudnai ◽  
...  

1992 ◽  
Vol 135 (9) ◽  
pp. 1042-1050 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sholom Wacholder ◽  
Debra T. Silverman ◽  
Joseph K. McLaughlin ◽  
Jack S. Mandel

2000 ◽  
Vol 10 (7) ◽  
pp. 455 ◽  
Author(s):  
SW Marshall ◽  
AE Waller ◽  
DP Loomis ◽  
JA Langlois

2007 ◽  
Vol 79 (9) ◽  
pp. 652-656 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marian K. Bakker ◽  
Hermien E.K. de Walle ◽  
Aileen Dequito ◽  
Paul B. van den Berg ◽  
Lolkje T.W. de Jong-van den Berg

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e16506-e16506
Author(s):  
Maxine Sun ◽  
Alexander P Cole ◽  
Nawar Hanna ◽  
Quoc-Dien Trinh

e16506 Background: Use of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) may confer a higher risk of cognitive impairment. Published results are variable and lack consensus. Our objective was to perform meta-analysis of the risk of overall cognitive impairment in men receiving ADT for prostate cancer. Methods: Relevant studies were identified through the search of English language articles indexed in PubMed Medline, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library and Web of Knowledge/Science until December 21st2016. Articles were included if they were published in English, reported on original research with adult male subjects undergoing treatment for prostate cancer, incorporated longitudinal comparisons, and included a control group. Controlled intervention studies were required to assess an established cognitive-related endpoint that was measured by a validated instrument, and measure cognitive impairment based on the International Cognition and Cancer Task Force (ICCTF) criteria. The effect of ADT on cognitive impairment was pooled using a random-effects model for controlled intervention and case-control studies separately. Results: Of 221 abstracts, 25 were selected for full-text review, and 8 studies, with 2 controlled studies and 6 case-control studies were identified. Overall cognitive impairment was not significantly different when the results of the 2 prospective studies were pooled (OR: 1.57, 95% CI: 0.50–4.92, P= 0.44), with significant heterogeneity between estimates ( I2: 83%). In retrospective data, the odds of developing any cognitive impairment were significantly higher in men treated with ADT (HR: 1.37, 95% CI: 1.06–1.77, P= 0.02), with considerable heterogeneity ( I2: 84%). Conclusions: The relationship between overall cognitive impairment and use of ADT defined according to the ICCTF criteria in a pooled-analysis of two prospective studies was inconclusive. Although retrospective studies suggest a higher risk of overall cognitive impairment after ADT, we caution readers not to over-interpret this finding given the limitations of retrospective data. Better well-designed prospective studies are needed to assess the effect of ADT on cognitive impairment with long-term follow-up.


Biostatistics ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 682-694 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Liu ◽  
W. Lu ◽  
V. Krogh ◽  
G. Hallmans ◽  
T. V. Clendenen ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (6) ◽  
pp. 566-568
Author(s):  
Vivian H Lyons ◽  
Ali Rowhani-Rahbar ◽  
Avanti Adhia ◽  
Noel S Weiss

Conducting case–control studies using the National Violent Death Reporting System (NVDRS) has the potential to introduce selection bias and misclassification through control selection. Some studies that use NVDRS compare groups of individuals who died by one mechanism, intent or circumstance, to individuals who died by another mechanism, intent or circumstance. For aetiological studies within NVDRS, the use of controls who had a different type of violent death has the potential to introduce selection bias, while relying on narrative summaries for exposure measurement may result in misclassification. We discuss these two methodological issues, and identify an unusual circumstance in which selection of live controls within NVDRS can be employed.


Author(s):  
Alan J. Silman ◽  
Gary J. Macfarlane ◽  
Tatiana Macfarlane

The most important aspect that will influence the validity of any epidemiological study is the careful selection of the subjects for investigation. Separate issues relate to the sampling of subjects for disease status in case–control studies, and sampling by exposure status in cohort studies. In simplest terms, the issues are who should be the cases and, given that, who should be the controls. Thus, in each instance the needs are to identify the sampling frame and then what should be the process for selecting the specific sample or subsamples needed for study. In addition to consideration of who to study, other factors such as how to identify and verify plus the size of the planned study are all topics to be addressed.


1992 ◽  
Vol 135 (9) ◽  
pp. 1019-1028 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sholom Wacholder ◽  
Joseph K. McLaughlin ◽  
Debra T. Silverman ◽  
Jack S. Mandel

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document