Choosing the number of controls in a matched case‐control study, some sample size, power and efficiency considerations
- 1 January 1986
- journal article
- Published by Wiley in Statistics in Medicine
- Vol. 5 (1) , 29-36
- https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.4780050106
Abstract
This paper investigates the efficiency of using multiple controls in a case‐control study, when there is a single binary exposure variable. Specifically, we consider the asymptotic power of the Cochran1 test statistic against non‐local alternatives of interest. When it is desirable to take multiple controls per case, we show that the marginal return rapidly diminishes as the number of controls per case increases. The effect is as strong, if not stronger, for non‐local alternatives as it is for local alternatives. Hence, it is rarely worth choosing more than three controls per case. We also provide a table of sample sizes necessary to achieve 80 per cent power for some odds ratios not equal to one. We extend the results to a special case when there are two binary exposure variables.Keywords
This publication has 11 references indexed in Scilit:
- The Relation between Score Tests and Approximate UMPU Tests in Exponential Models Common in BiometryBiometrics, 1983
- Matched Case-Control Studies with a Variable Number of Controls per CaseJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C: Applied Statistics, 1980
- How many controls?Journal of Chronic Diseases, 1976
- Efficiency of Case-Control Studies with Multiple Controls Per Case: Continuous or Dichotomous DataPublished by JSTOR ,1975
- A Simple Example of a Comparison Involving Quantal DataBiometrika, 1966
- THE COMPARISON OF PERCENTAGES IN MATCHED SAMPLESBiometrika, 1950
- Note on the sampling error of the difference between correlated proportions or percentagesPsychometrika, 1947