Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Appending Epidemiological Studies to Conventional Case–Control Studies (Hybride Case–Control Studies)

  • Published:
European Journal of Epidemiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper summarizes several studies that can be appended to conventional case–control studies especially in the context of case–control studies that focus on etiologic questions. Appending studies to case–control studies may further add to the understanding of the epidemiology of diseases under investigation. We explain their uses, implications and limitations. One can append the following studies to a case–control study:(1) case-only study, (2) case–crossover study, (3) case cross-sectional study, (4) control cross-sectional study, (5) case follow-up study, and (6) control follow-up study. The choice of the additional studies that are appended to the conventional case–control study has implications for the set of data and biological material that has to be collected, the ethical review board and the informed consent. Due to several limitations, the attachment of additional studies to a case–control study should be carefully considered and limited to only few additional studies in order to avoid overburden of the study participants and study personnel.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Rothman KJ. Modern epidemiology. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1986, pp. 62–69.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Wacholder S, McLaughlin JK, Silverman DT, Mandel JS. Selection of controls in case –control studies. I. Principles. Am J Epidemiol 1992;135:1019–1028.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Wacholder S, Silverman DT, McLaughlin JK, Mandel JS. Selection of controls in case –control studies. II. Types of controls. Am J Epidemiol 1992;135:1029–1041.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Wacholder S, Silverman DT, McLaughlin JK, Mandel JS. Selection of controls in case –control studies. III. Design options. Am J Epidemiol 1992;135:1042–1050.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Armenian HK, ed. Applications of the case –control method. Epidemiol Rev 1994;16:1–164.

  6. Wynder EL, Graham EA. Tobacco smoking as a pos-sible etiologic factor in bronchiogenic carcinoma. A study of six hundred and eighty-four proved cases. JAMA 1950;143:329–336.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Royal College of General Practitioners. Oral contra-ception and thromboembolic disease. J Roy Coll Gen Pract 1967;13:267–279.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Henderson BE, Benton B, Jin J, Yu MC, Pike MC. Risk factors for cancer of the testis in young men. Int J Cancer 1979;23:598–602.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Comstock GW. Evaluating vaccination effectiveness and vaccine efficacy by means of case –control studies. Epidemiol Rev 1994;16:77–89.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Weiss NS. Application of the case –control method in the evaluation of screening. Epidemiol Rev 1994;16: 102–108.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Weiss NS. Clinical epidemiology. 2nd edn. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Austin H, Hill HA, Flanders WD, Greenberg RS. Limitations in the application of case –control methodology. Epidemiol Rev 1994;116:65–76.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Rothman KJ, Greendland S. Modern epidemiology. 2nd edn. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Khoury MJ, Flanders WD. Nontraditional epidemio-logic approaches in the analysis of gene –environment interaction:Case –control studies with no controls! Am J Epidemiol 1996;144:207–213.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Yang Q, Khoury MJ, Sun F, Flanders WD. Case-only design to measure gene –gene interaction. Epidemiology 1999;10:167–170.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Gershon D. Microarray technology:An array of opportunities. Nature 2002;416:885–891.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Gottardo R, Pannucci JA, Kuske CR, Brettin T. Sta-tistical analysis of microarray data:A Bayesian approach. Biostatistics 2003;4:597–620.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Maclure M. The case-crossover design:A method for studying transient effects on the risk of acute events. Am J Epidemiol 1991;133:144–153.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Mittleman MA, Maclure M, Sherwood JB, et al. Triggering acute myocardial infarction onset by epi-sodes of anger. Circulation 1995;92:1720–1725.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Mittleman MA, Mintzer D, Maclure M, Toffer GH, Sherwood JB, Muller JE. Triggering of myocardial infarction by cocaine. Circulation 1999;21:2732–2741.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Petridou E, Mittleman MA, Trohanis D, Dessypris N, Karpathios T, Trichopoulos D. Transient exposures and the risk of childhood injury:A case-cross-over study in Greece. Epidemiology 1998;9:622–625.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Hernandez-Diaz S, Hernan MA, Meyer K, Werler MM, Mitchell AA. Case-crossover and case-time-con-trol designs in birth dectects epidemiology. Am J Epidemiol 2003;158:385–391.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Navidi W. Bidirectional case-crossover designs for exposures with time trends. Biometrics 1998;54:596–605.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Greenland S. Confounding and exposure trends in case-crossover and case-time-control designs. Epidemiology 1996;7:231–239.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Suissa S. The case-time-control design. Epidemiology 1995;6:248–253.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Suissa S. The case-time-control design:Further assumptions and conditions. Epidemiology 1998;9: 441–445.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Bateson TF, Schwartz J. Control for seasonal variation and time trend in case-crossover studies of acute effects of environmental exposures. Epidemiology 1999;10: 539–544.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Levy D, Lumley T, Sheppard L, Kuafman J, Checkoway H. Referent selection in case-crossover analyses of acute health effects of air pollution. Epidemiology 2001;12:186–192.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Carpenter RG, Irgens LM, Blair PS, et al. Sudden unexplained infant death in 20 regions in Europe:Case control study. Lancet 2004;363:185–191.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Krebsregister Saarland. Jahresbericht Krebsregister Saarland 1996/1997. Saarbrücken:Ministerium für Frauen, Arbeit, Gesundheit und Soziales, 2000.

  31. Stang A, Stang K, Stegmaier C, Hakulinen T, Jöckel KH. Skin melanoma in Saarland:Incidence, survival and mortality 1970 –96. Eur J Cancer Prev 2001;10: 407–415.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Vajdic CM, Kricker A, Giblin M, et al. Incidence of ocular melanoma in Australia from 1990 to 1998. Int J Cancer 2003;105:117–122.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Timmer A, Ahrens W, Stegmaier C, et al. Risikofaktoren und Operationsraten des Gallensteinlei-dens. Ergebnisse einer bevölkerungsbezogenen Studie. Med Klinik 2000;95:672–677.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Stang A, Anastassiou G, Ahrens W, Bromen K, Bornfeld N, Jöckel KH. The possible role of radio-frequency radiation in the development of uveal melanoma. Epidemiology 2001;12:7–12.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Thompson ML, Myers JE, Kriebel D. Prevalence odds ratio or prevalence ratio in the analysis of cross sectional data:What is to be done? Occup Environ Med 1998;55:272–277.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Sweeney C, Farrow DC. Differential survival related to smoking among patients with renal cell carcinoma. Epidemiology 2000;11:344–346.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Jöckel KH, Ahrens W, Jahn I, Pohlabeln H, Bolm-Audorff U. Occupational risk factors for lung cancer:A case –control study in West-Gemany. Int J Epidemiol 1998;27:549–560.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Jöckel KH, Ahrens W, Merzenich H, et al. Integrierter Ansatz zum Risikomonitoring auf der Basis eines hybriden Populationpanels. Abschlußbericht. Bremen, 1996.

  39. Merzenich H, Hartwig A, Ahrens W, et al. Biomonitoring on carcinogenic metals and oxidative DNA damage in a cross-sectional study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2001;10:515–522.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Biometry and Epidemiology, Institute for Medical Informatics, University of Duisburg Essen, Hufelandstr. 55, 45122, Essen, Germany

    Andreas Stang

  2. Biometry and Epidemiology, Institute for Medical Informatics, University of Essen, Essen, Germany

    Karl-Heinz Jöckel

Authors
  1. Andreas Stang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Karl-Heinz Jöckel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andreas Stang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Stang, A., Jöckel, KH. Appending Epidemiological Studies to Conventional Case–Control Studies (Hybride Case–Control Studies). Eur J Epidemiol 19, 527–532 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EJEP.0000032380.03554.9f

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EJEP.0000032380.03554.9f

Search

Navigation