Dataset Information

Case-control matching: effects, misconceptions, and recommendations.

ABSTRACT: Misconceptions about the impact of case-control matching remain common. We discuss several subtle problems associated with matched case-control studies that do not arise or are minor in matched cohort studies: (1) matching, even for non-confounders, can create selection bias; (2) matching distorts dose-response relations between matching variables and the outcome; (3) unbiased estimation requires accounting for the actual matching protocol as well as for any residual confounding effects; (4) for efficiency, identically matched groups should be collapsed; (5) matching may harm precision and power; (6) matched analyses may suffer from sparse-data bias, even when using basic sparse-data methods. These problems support advice to limit case-control matching to a few strong well-measured confounders, which would devolve to no matching if no such confounders are measured. On the positive side, odds ratio modification by matched variables can be assessed in matched case-control studies without further data, and when one knows either the distribution of the matching factors or their relation to the outcome in the source population, one can estimate and study patterns in absolute rates. Throughout, we emphasize distinctions from the more intuitive impacts of cohort matching.

SUBMITTER: Mansournia MA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9188848 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Case-control matching: effects, misconceptions, and recommendations.

Mansournia Mohammad Ali MA Jewell Nicholas Patrick NP Greenland Sander S

European journal of epidemiology 20171103 1

Misconceptions about the impact of case-control matching remain common. We discuss several subtle problems associated with matched case-control studies that do not arise or are minor in matched cohort studies: (1) matching, even for non-confounders, can create selection bias; (2) matching distorts dose-response relations between matching variables and the outcome; (3) unbiased estimation requires accounting for the actual matching protocol as well as for any residual confounding effects; (4) for ...[more]

PMID: 29101596

Similar Datasets

Project description:A large variety of misconceptions about learning, teaching, and other educational topics is prevalent in the public but also among educational professionals. Such misconceptions may lead to ill-advised judgments and actions in private life, professional practice, and policymaking. Developing effective correction strategies for these misconceptions hinges on a better understanding of the factors that make individuals susceptible to or resilient against misconceptions. The present study surveyed students from educational and non-educational fields of study to investigate whether the endorsement of four typical educational misconceptions can be predicted by study-related variables (i.e., field of study and study progress) and by students' cognitive ability (i.e., numeracy), epistemic orientations, general world views (i.e., conservative orientation), and education-related values (i.e., educational goals). A sample of N = 315 undergraduates in teacher education and education- and non-education-related fields of study completed an online survey. Results from structural equation models showed that the pattern of effects strongly varied across the specific misconceptions. The two misconceptions related to teaching factors (i.e., class size and effectiveness of direct instruction as a teaching method) were the most strongly affected by the field of study and had an association with conservative orientation. In contrast, the misconception about the effectiveness of grade retention as an educational intervention was more prevalent among the students emphasizing conventional educational goals, such as discipline. None of the investigated explanatory variables proved predictive of the misconception about the "feminization" of education as an educational-equity topic. Moreover, neither numeracy nor epistemic orientation was found to have any effect on the endorsement of educational misconceptions. These findings emphasize the topic dependency of the factors that make individuals susceptible to misconceptions. Future research and intervention approaches need to consider the topic specificity of educational misconceptions.

Dataset Information

Case-control matching: effects, misconceptions, and recommendations.

Publications

Case-control matching: effects, misconceptions, and recommendations.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets