Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (30)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by WEST, D. W
Right arrow Articles by ALLRED, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by WEST, D. W
Right arrow Articles by ALLRED, R.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 1984 Oxford University Press

research-article

Differences in Risk Estimations from a Hospital and a Population-Based Case-Control Study

DEE W WEST*, KATHARINA L SCHUMAN*, JOSEPH L LYON*, LINDA M ROBISON* and RANDY ALLRED{dagger}

*Department of Family and Community Medicine. University of Utah 50 North Medical Drive. Salt Lake City. UT 84132, USA.
{dagger}Environmental Health Associates. Inc. 2150 Shattuck Avenue, Berkeley. CA 94704.

West DW, (Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Utah, 50 North Medical Drive, Salt Lake City, Utah, 84132 USA) Schuman KL, Lyon JL, Robison LMand Allred R. Differences in risk estimations from a hospital and a population-based case-control study. International Journal of Epidemiology 1984, 13: 235–239.

A hospital-based and population-based case-control study of cervical cancer (in situ and invasive) was conducted in urban Utah to determine if methods of respondent selection affect estimates of risk for variables thought to be associated with the disease. Population cases (N = 409) and cases from two large hospitals (N = 124) were identified through the Utah Cancer Registry. Population-based controls (N = 379) were identified through random-digit dialling; hospital-based controls (N = 150) with gynaecological disorders other than cancers and elective abortions were chosen from the same hospitals as the cases for the hospital study. Both control groups were frequency matched to cases by age. Approximately 79% of the identified cases and 85% of the selected controls completed interviews conducted in their homes. Most risk estimates were lower in the hospital-based study because of the more case-like attributes of this group. Stratified analysis for social class led to adjusted risk estimates which were lower than the unadjusted risk estimates for the population-based study, but not for the hospital-based study. The close social class matching in the hospital-based study seems to have led to concurrent overmatching on other risk factors since many of these are closely related to social class. Findings are discussed in terms of implications for case-control study design.

Revised 1 June 1983


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Neurol. Neurosurg. PsychiatryHome page
K Lipska, P N Sylaja, P S Sarma, K R Thankappan, V R Kutty, R S Vasan, and K Radhakrishnan
Risk factors for acute ischaemic stroke in young adults in South India
J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry, September 1, 2007; 78(9): 959 - 963.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am J EpidemiolHome page
Y. Zhang, P. F. Coogan, J. R. Palmer, B. L. Strom, and L. Rosenberg
Cigarette Smoking and Increased Risk of Mucinous Epithelial Ovarian Cancer
Am. J. Epidemiol., January 15, 2004; 159(2): 133 - 139.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
StrokeHome page
P. U. Heuschmann, D. Neureiter, M. Gesslein, B. Craiovan, M. Maass, G. Faller, G. Beck, B. Neundoerfer, and P. L. Kolominsky-Rabas
Association Between Infection With Helicobacter pylori and Chlamydia pneumoniae and Risk of Ischemic Stroke Subtypes: Results From a Population-Based Case-Control Study
Stroke, October 1, 2001; 32(10): 2253 - 2258.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.