Hospital versus Neighbourhood Controls in the Assessment of Dietary Risk Factors
- 1 June 1990
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in International Journal of Epidemiology
- Vol. 19 (2) , 354-361
- https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/19.2.354
Abstract
González CA (Unit of Epidemiology, Hospital de Mataró, 08301-Mataró, Barcelona, Spain), Torrent M, Agudo A and Riboli E. Hospital versus neighbourhood controls in the assessment of dietary risk factors. International Journal of Epidemiology 1990, 19: 354–361. The selection of the best control group is a major concern in the design of any case-control study, because of its enormous implications on both internal validity and cost. We compare the dietary habits of hospital and neighbourhood control groups which had both been used in a case-control study on bladder cancer. The analysis is based on 485 matched sets. No differences were observed between the two groups in terms of nutrient consumption nor in consumption of specific foods or food groups. Alcohol consumption represents an exception. This may be attributed to the use of incorrect exclusion criteria given that alcohol consumption was not one of the major determinants of the original study. We conclude that, provided correct exclusion criteria are used, hospital controls may be as suitable as neighbourhood controls in the assessment of dietary risk factors in case-control studies in Spain.Keywords
This publication has 6 references indexed in Scilit:
- DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OF A CASE-CONTROL STUDY OF BLADDER-CARCINOMA IN SPAIN1989
- Cancer Case-Control Studies with Other Cancers as ControlsInternational Journal of Epidemiology, 1988
- CASE-CONTROL STUDIES USING OTHER DISEASES AS CONTROLS: PROBLEMS OF EXCLUDING EXPOSURE-RELATED DISEASESAmerican Journal of Epidemiology, 1988
- Hospital or population controls? An unanswered questionJournal of Chronic Diseases, 1983
- COST OF CASE-CONTROL STUDIESAmerican Journal of Epidemiology, 1981
- Coffee and Cancer of the PancreasNew England Journal of Medicine, 1981