Observational studies.

J F Peipert; M G Phipps

doi:10.1097/00003081-199806000-00004

Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 9646956

Observational studies.

J F Peipert·M G Phipps

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Observational studies are important methodologies to evaluate exposures and risk factors that are not amenable to experimental trials. They offer the advantage of being more generalizable to our patients, as these studies may have more liberal inclusion criteria than the typical randomized trial. Their disadvantage is their susceptibility to biases and their inability to control for unknown factors that may impact on the outcome of interest. Establishing causality of an association noted in observational studies is an intricate process that requires careful assessment. Clinicians and researchers should be familiar with observational studies so they may better evaluate a proposed causal relationship and the quality of reports claiming such relationships. Only then can they determine if the findings are valid and applicable to their patient population.

Explore related subjects

Case-Control Studies Cohort Studies Cross-Sectional Studies Humans Longitudinal Studies Prospective Studies Retrospective Studies Selection Bias Journal Article Review

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

J F Peipert, M G Phipps. 1998. Observational studies.. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003081-199806000-00004

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2001

The future of genetic case-control studies.

The case-control study design has been a veritable workhorse in epidemiological research since its inception and acceptance as a valid and valued field of inquiry. The reasons for this owe to the simplicity of the required sampling and the (potential) ease of analysis and interpretation of results. Unfortunately, there are a number of problems that plague the use of the case-control design in assessing relationships between genetic variation and disease susceptibility in the population at large. Many of these problems are entirely analogous to problems that inhere in applications of the case-control design in nongenetic settings. These problems include stratification, the assessment of statistical significance, heterogeneity, and the interpretation of multiple outcomes or phenotypic information. In this chapter we describe 10 problems thought to plague genetic case-control studies and offer potential solutions to each. Many of our proposed solutions require the use of multiple DNA markers to accommodate the genetic background of the individuals sampled as cases and controls. It is hoped that our discussions and proposals will spark further debate about the analysis and ultimate utility of the case-control study in genetic epidemiology research.

Case-Control Studies↗

PubMed2001

Optimum study designs.

Because simplistic designs will lead to prohibitively large sample sizes, the optimization of genetic study designs is critical for successfully mapping genes for complex diseases. Creative designs are necessary for detecting and amplifying the usually weak signals for complex traits. Two important outcomes of a study design--power and resolution--are implicitly tied together by the principle of uncertainty. Overemphasis on either one may lead to suboptimal designs. To achieve optimality for a particular study, therefore, practical measures such as cost-effectiveness must be used to strike a balance between power and resolution. In this light, the myriad of factors involved in study design can be checked for their effects on the ultimate outcomes, and the popular existing designs can be sorted into building blocks that may be useful for particular situations. It is hoped that imaginative construction of novel designs using such building blocks will lead to enhanced efficiency in finding genes for complex human traits.

Case-Control Studies↗

PubMed2000

Prostate cancer screening.

Prostate cancer is an important and growing public health problem. PSA testing is able to lead to the identification of large numbers of cases of prostate cancer while still asymptomatic. This provides the potential for important reductions in prostate cancer mortality through the introduction of screening programs. The most reliable evidence that this potential can be realised can only come from randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Alternative sources of evidence are compared with that from RCTs; the costs of a wrong decision would be high and it is argued that the case for RCTs is clear.

Case-Control Studies↗