PubMed HealthSearch

PubMed · 2277882

Adjusting for misselection using subsampling in epidemiological studies.

Abstract

In epidemiological research it is sometimes necessary to conduct a case-control study in a part of the population which is not exposed to certain risk factors. Such a study design may be useful to investigate the risk related to a weak carcinogen in presence of other strong risk factors. It may happen that some individuals are wrongly included in the study group due to misreporting of the true exposure status. This misselection may cause biased odds ratio estimates of the factors of interest. It is therefore recommended that an evaluation study to validate the selection procedure is undertaken. We propose a two-stage sample design, consisting of a case-control study and a validation study in a subsample. Misselection rates in cases and control for different exposure groups may be estimated in the subsample and used to correct the odds ratio estimation from the first stage. It is shown how the total sample size should be attributed to the case-control sample and to the second-stage sample in order to give an unbiased estimate with minimal variance. The allocation is shown to be dependent on a number of parameters which is illustrated numerically and graphically. Efficiency considerations are also addressed.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

M Blettner, H Becher. 1990. Adjusting for misselection using subsampling in epidemiological studies.. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.4780091111

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Nontraditional epidemiologic approaches in the analysis of gene-environment interaction: case-control studies with no controls!

Although case-control studies are suitable for assessing gene-environment interactions, choosing appropriate control subjects is a valid concern in these studies. The authors review three nontraditional study designs that do not include a control group: 1) the case-only study, 2) the case-parental control study, and 3) the affected relative-pair method. In case-only studies, one can examine the association between an exposure and a genotype among case subjects only. Odds ratios are interpreted as a synergy index on a multiplicative scale, with independence assumed between the exposure and the genotype. In case-parental control studies, one can compare the genotypic distribution of case subjects with the expected distribution based on parental genotypes when there is no association between genotype and disease; the effect of a genotype can be stratified according to case subjects' exposure status. In affected relative-pair studies, the distribution of alleles identical by descent between pairs of affected relatives is compared with the expected distribution based on the absence of genetic linkage between the locus and the disease; the analysis can be stratified according to exposure status. Some or all of these methods have certain limitations, including linkage disequilibrium, confounding, assumptions of Mendelian transmission, an inability to measure exposure effects directly, and the use of a multiplicative scale to test for interaction. Nevertheless, they provide important tools to assess gene-environment interaction in disease etiology.

Case-Control Studies

Cigarette smoking and pancreas cancer: a case control study of the search programme of the IARC.

A multi-centre case-control study of pancreas cancer, designed to be population-based, to use a random sample of local populations as controls and to use a common protocol and core questionnaire, was conducted as the first study of the SEARCH programme of the International Agency for Research on Cancer. "Ever-smokers" were found to be at increased risk for pancreas cancer compared with "never-smokers" consistently in all strata of gender, response status and centre. Risk of pancreas cancer was found to increase with increasing lifetime consumption of cigarettes, the relative risk rising to 2.70 (95% C.I. 1.95 to 3.74) in the highest intake category. The overall trend in risk was highly significant and the association was found consistently in each stratum of gender, response status and centre. Fifteen years had to pass from quitting cigarette smoking until the risk fell to a level compatible with that in never-smokers among the heaviest group of smokers; among the 2 lowest tertiles this happened within 5 years. Further, reported smoking habits more than 15 years before diagnosis appeared to have no influence on pancreas-cancer risk, irrespective of amount smoked. The results are consistent with a causal role for cigarette smoking in the aetiology of pancreas cancer and illustrate that ceasing to smoke cigarettes can lead to reductions in the elevated risk of pancreas cancer produced by this habit.

Case-Control Studies