» Articles » PMID: 9690747

An Empirical Investigation on Matching in Published Case-control Studies

Overview
Journal Eur J Epidemiol
Specialty Public Health
Date 1998 Aug 5
PMID 9690747
Citations 4
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The methodological discussion about matching when recruiting controls in case-control studies has been controversial for a long time. To delineate the impact of this discussion on the practice of matching we reviewed 266 case-control studies published in nine yearly volumes of three major epidemiological journals within the period 1955-1994. Among studies published until 1980 71.7% of the control groups were recruited by individual matching compared to 46.4% in 1994. This decline is paralleled by an increase in the application of frequency matching (from 5.0% to 26.2%). As the issue of matching is closely connected with methodological questions of the statistical analysis we also examined the type of analysis applied to the data. We found that the use of logistic regression modeling has dramatically increased during this period (from 18.4% up to 87.2%), whereas application of the traditional Mantel-Haenszel technique for estimating summary odds ratios has nearly vanished. The correct approach for individually matched data in the logistic modeling framework, the conditional likelihood technique, has been unknown in the early part of the time window of our investigation, but is even nowadays applied by only three quarters of the corresponding studies. Our literature-based investigation provides thus compelling evidence that the type of control selection and statistical analysis used in case-control studies have changed substantially during recent years.

Citing Articles

Explanation and Elaboration Document for the STROBE-Vet Statement: Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology-Veterinary Extension.

OConnor A, Sargeant J, Dohoo I, Erb H, Cevallos M, Egger M J Vet Intern Med. 2016; 30(6):1896-1928.

PMID: 27859752 PMC: 5115190. DOI: 10.1111/jvim.14592.


Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses.

Stang A Eur J Epidemiol. 2010; 25(9):603-5.

PMID: 20652370 DOI: 10.1007/s10654-010-9491-z.


Why match? Investigating matched case-control study designs with causal effect estimation.

Rose S, van der Laan M Int J Biostat. 2010; 5(1):Article 1.

PMID: 20231866 PMC: 2827892. DOI: 10.2202/1557-4679.1127.


Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration.

Vandenbroucke J, von Elm E, Altman D, Gotzsche P, Mulrow C, Pocock S PLoS Med. 2007; 4(10):e297.

PMID: 17941715 PMC: 2020496. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0040297.

References
1.
Howe G, Choi B . Methodological issues in case-control studies: validity and power of various design/analysis strategies. Int J Epidemiol. 1983; 12(2):238-45. DOI: 10.1093/ije/12.2.238. View

2.
Pike M, Hill A, Smith P . Bias and efficiency in logistic analyses of stratified case-control studies. Int J Epidemiol. 1980; 9(1):89-95. DOI: 10.1093/ije/9.1.89. View

3.
Wacholder S, Silverman D, McLaughlin J, Mandel J . Selection of controls in case-control studies. III. Design options. Am J Epidemiol. 1992; 135(9):1042-50. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a116398. View

4.
Thompson W, Kelsey J, Walter S . Cost and efficiency in the choice of matched and unmatched case-control study designs. Am J Epidemiol. 1982; 116(5):840-51. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a113475. View

5.
LILIENFELD A, Lilienfeld D . A century of case-control studies: progress?. J Chronic Dis. 1979; 32(1-2):5-13. DOI: 10.1016/0021-9681(79)90004-3. View