PubMed HealthSearch

PubMed · 9232759

Re-using data from case-control studies.

Abstract

Despite its ability to maximize statistical power while keeping data collection costs to a minimum, case-control sampling provides a non-representative sample of the population. When fitting a logistic regression model to data obtained in such a study, using the variable stratifying the population as the response, it is well known that the estimate of the constant term will be biased, but those of the coefficients of the covariates will not. However, subsequent to the case-control study, it is often desired to conduct a secondary analysis, using a variable that was previously a covariate in the main study as the response. If this new response is associated with the original variable used to stratify the population into cases and controls, a conventional logistic regression analysis will usually result in biased estimates of all the regression coefficients, not just the constant. This situation has recently been studied by Nagelkerke et al. who describe some situations where no bias occurs. In this paper we discuss how to calculate maximum likelihood estimates of all the regression coefficients, in the situation where the sampling rates for cases and controls are known. An example using data from the New Zealand Cot Death Study is presented.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

A J Lee, L McMurchy, A J Scott. 1997-06-30. Re-using data from case-control studies.. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19970630)16%3A12%3C1377%3A%3Aaid-sim557%3E3.0.co%3B2-k

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Attributable fraction for cardiac malformations.

To the authors' knowledge, attributable fractions for cardiac malformations have not been reported before. The Baltimore-Washington Infant Study published factors associated with several major cardiac malformations in Maryland, the District of Columbia, and adjacent counties of northern Virginia in 1981-1989. For eight of these malformations, the authors provide attributable fractions of those factors that are potentially causal. Summary attributable fractions range from 13.6% (four factors) for hypoplastic left heart to 30.2% (seven factors) for transposition of great arteries with intact ventricular septum. Extra attributable fraction for factor x, defined as summary attributable fraction for all factors minus that for all but x, is largest for: 1) paternal marijuana use in transposition of great arteries with intact ventricular septum, 7.8%; 2) paternal anesthesia in tetralogy of Fallot, 3.6%; 3) painting in atrioventricular septal defect with Down syndrome, 5.1 %; 4) solvent/degreasing agent exposure in hypoplastic left heart, 4.6%; 5) sympathomimetics in coarctation of aorta, 5.8%; 6) pesticide exposure in isolated membranous ventricular septal defect, 5.5%; 7) hair dye in multiple/multiplex membranous ventricular septal defect, 3.3%; and 8) urinary tract infection in atrial septal defect, 6.4%. Percent-of-cases-exposed dominates relative risk in attributable fraction. If these factors are causal, the larger extra attributable fractions suggest the potential for prevention by specific interventions before/during pregnancy.

Case-Control Studies