Case–control matching: effects, misconceptions, and recommendations

European Journal of Epidemiology

Volumn 33, Issue 1, 2018, Pages 5-14

  Mansournia, Mohammad Ali ^a   Jewell, Nicholas Patrick ^b   Greenland, Sander ^c,d  

^a TEHRAN UNIVERSITY OF MEDICAL SCIENCES   (Iran)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Bias; Case control studies; Confounding; Matching; Odds ratio

Indexed keywords

COHORT ANALYSIS; HUMAN; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; SELECTION BIAS; CASE CONTROL STUDY; EPIDEMIOLOGY; METHODOLOGY; ODDS RATIO; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL BIAS;

BIAS; CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; COHORT STUDIES; CONFOUNDING FACTORS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); HUMANS; MATCHED-PAIR ANALYSIS; ODDS RATIO; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 85032785627     PISSN: 03932990     EISSN: 15737284     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10654-017-0325-0     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. Rothman KJ, Greenland S, Lash TL. Design strategies to improve study accuracy. In: Rothman KJ, Greenland S, Lash TL, eds. Modern Epidemiology. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2008. p. 168–82.
2. Greenland S. Partial and marginal matching in case-control studies. In: Moolgavkar SH, Prentice RL, editors. Modern statistical methods in chronic disease epidemiology. New York: Wiley; 1986. p. 35–49.
3. Rothman KJ, Greenland S, Lash TL. Case-control studies. In: Rothman KJ, Greenland S, Lash TL, eds. Modern Epidemiology. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2008. p. 111–27.
4. Jewell NP. Statistics for epidemiology, chapter 5. Boca Raton: Chapman & Hall/CRC; 2004.
5. Glymour MM, Greenland S. Causal diagrams. In: Rothman KJ, Greenland S, Lash T, editors. Modern epidemiology. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2008. p. 183–209.
6. Jewell NP. Statistics for epidemiology, chapter 8. Boca Raton: Chapman & Hall/CRC; 2004.
7. Greenland S, Mansournia MA. Limitations of individual causal models, causal graphs, and ignorability assumptions, as illustrated by random confounding and design unfaithfulness. Eur J Epidemiol. 2015;30:1101–10.
8. Mansournia MA, Higgins JPT, Sterne JAC, Hernán MA. Biases in randomized trials: a conversation between trialists and epidemiologists. Epidemiology. 2017;28:54–9.
9. Suzuki E, Tsuda T, Mitsuhashi T, Mansournia MA, Yamamoto E. Errors in causal inference: an organizational schema for systematic error and random error. Ann Epidemiol. 2016;26:788–93.
10. Mansournia MA, Etminan M, Danaei G, Kaufman JS, Collins G. Handling time varying confounding in observational research. BMJ 2017;359:j4587.
11. Rothman KJ. Modern epidemiology, chapter 13. Boston: Little, Brown; 1986.
12. Pearce N. Analysis of matched case-control studies. BMJ. 2016;352:i969.
13. Gharibzadeh S, Mohammad K, Rahimiforoushani A, Amouzegar A, Mansournia MA. Standardization as a tool for causal inference in medical research. Arch Iran Med. 2016;19:666–70.
14. Greenland S, Lash TL. Bias analysis. In: Rothman KJ, Greenland S, Lash TL, editors. Modern epidemiology. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2008. p. 345–80.
15. Hernán MA, Hernandez-Diaz S, Robins JM. A structural approach to selection bias. Epidemiology. 2004;15:615–25.
16. Gail MH. Selection bias. In: Armitage P, Colton T, editors. Encyclopedia of biostatistics. 2nd ed. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons; 2005. p. 4869–70.
17. Mansournia MA, Hernán MA, Greenland S. Matched designs and causal diagrams. Int J Epidemiol. 2013;42:860–9.
18. Smith PG, Day NE. Matching and confounding in the design and analysis of epidemiological case-control studies. In: Blithell JF, Coppi R, editors. Perspectives in medical statistics. New York: Academic Press; 1981.
19. Kupper LL, Karon JM, Kleinbaum DG, Morgenstern H, Lewis DK. Matching in epidemiologic studies: validity and efficiency considerations. Biometrics. 1981;37:271–92.
20. Samuels ML. Matching and design efficiency in epidemiological studies. Biometrika. 1981;68:577–88.
21. Thomas DC, Greenland S. The relative efficiencies of matched and independent sample designs for case-control studies. J Chronic Dis. 1983;36:685–97.
22. Smith PG, Day NE. The design of case-control studies: the influence of confounding and interaction effects. Int J Epidemiol. 1984;13:356–65.
23. Thomas DC, Greenland S. The efficiency of matching in case-control studies of risk-factor interactions. J Chronic Dis. 1985;38:569–74.
24. Greenland S. Estimating variances of standardized estimators in case-control studies and sparse data. J Chronic Dis. 1986;39:473–7.
25. Greenland S, Rothman KJ. Introduction to stratified analysis. In: Rothman KJ, Greenland S, Lash TL, editors. Modern epidemiology. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2008. p. 258–82.
26. Clayton D, Hills M. Statistical models in epidemiology, chapter 18. New York: Oxford University Press; 1993.
27. Greenland S. Re: Estimating relative risk functions in case-control studies using a nonparametric logistic regression. Am J Epidemiol. 1997;146:883–4.
28. Breslow NE, Lubin JH, Marek P, Langholz B. Multiplicative models and cohort analysis. J Am Stat Assoc. 1983;78:1–12.
29. Greenland S. Introduction to regression modeling. In: Rothman KJ, Greenland S, Lash TL, editors. Modern epidemiology. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2008. p. 418–55.
30. Greenland S. Applications of stratified analysis methods. In: Rothman KJ, Greenland S, Lash TL, editors. Modern epidemiology. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2008. p. 283–302.
31. Jewell NP. Statistics for epidemiology, chapter 16. Boca Raton: Chapman & Hall/CRC; 2004.
32. Robinson LD, Jewell NP. Some surprising results about covariate adjustment in logistic regression. Int Stat Rev. 1991;59:227–40.
33. Brookmeyer R, Liang KY, Linet M. Matched case-control designs and overmatched analyses. Am J Epidemiol. 1986;124:693–701.
34. Greenland S. Quantifying biases in causal models: classical confounding vs collider-stratification bias. Epidemiology. 2003;14:300–6.
35. Didelez V, Kreiner S, Keiding N. On the use of graphical models for inference under outcome dependent sampling. Stat Sci. 2010;25:368–87.
36. Kalish LA. Matching on a non-risk factor in the design of case-control studies does not always result in an efficiency loss. Am J Epidemiol. 1986;123:551–4.
37. Mansournia MA, Altman DG. Inverse probability weighting. BMJ. 2016;15(352):i189.
38. Mansournia MA, Danaei G, Forouzanfar MH, Mahmoudi M, Jamali M, Mansournia N, Mohammad K. Effect of physical activity on functional performance and knee pain in patients with osteoarthritis: analysis with marginal structural models. Epidemiology. 2012;23:631–40.
39. Szklo M, Nieto F. Epidemiology: beyond the basics, chapter 6. 3rd ed. Sudbury: Jones and Bartlett Publishers; 2014.
40. Greenland S. Tests for interaction in epidemiologic studies: a review and a study of power. Stat Med. 1983;2:243–51.
41. Greenland S, Maldonado G. The interpretation of multiplicative model parameters as standardized parameters. Stat Med. 1994;13:989–99.
42. Mohammad K, Hashemi Nazari SS, Mansournia N, Mansournia MA. Marginal versus conditional causal effects. J Biostat Epidemiol. 2015;1:121–8.
43. Greenland S. Dose-response and trend analysis: alternatives to category-indicator regression. Epidemiology. 1995;6:356–65.
44. Sjölander A, Greenland S. Ignoring the matching variables in cohort studies: when is it valid and why? Stat Med. 2013;32:4696–708.
45. Greenland S, Morgenstern H. Matching and efficiency in cohort studies. Am J Epidemiol. 1990;131:151–9.
46. Kurth T, Walker AM, Glynn RJ, Chan KA, Gaziano JM, Berger K, Robins JM. Results of multivariable logistic regression, propensity matching, propensity adjustment, and propensity-based weighting under conditions of nonuniform effect. Am J Epidemiol. 2006;163:262–70.
47. Greenland S, Robins JM, Pearl J. Confounding and collapsibility in causal inference. Stat Sci. 1999;14:29–46.
48. Mansournia MA, Greenland S. The relation of collapsibility and confounding to faithfulness and stability. Epidemiology. 2015;26:466–72.
49. Greenland S, Pearl J. Adjustments and their consequences: collapsibility analysis using graphical models. Int Stat Rev. 2011;79:401–26.
50. Pang M, Kaufman JS, Platt RW. Studying noncollapsibility of the odds ratio with marginal structural and logistic regression models. Stat Methods Med Res. 2016;25:1925–37.
51. Lombard HL, Doering CR. Cancer studies in Massachusetts. 2. Habits, characteristics and environment of individuals with and without cancer. N Engl J Med. 1928;198:481–7.
52. Lane-Claypon JE. A further report on cancer of the breast. London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office; 1926.
53. VanderWeele TJ, Shpitser I. A new criterion for confounder selection. Biometrics. 2011;67:1406–13.
54. Greenland S, Schwartzbaum JA, Finkle WD. Problems from small samples and sparse data in conditional logistic regression analysis. Am J Epidemiol. 2000;151:531–9.
55. Greenland S. Small-sample bias and corrections for conditional maximum-likelihood odds-ratio estimators. Biostatistics. 2000;1:113–22.
56. Jewell NP. Small-sample bias of point estimators of the odds ratio from matched sets. Biometrics. 1984;40:421–35.
57. Greenland S, Mansournia MA, Altman DG. Sparse data bias: a problem hiding in plain sight. BMJ. 2016;27(352):i1981.
58. Greenland S, Mansournia MA. Penalization, bias reduction, and default priors in logistic and related categorical and survival regressions. Stat Med. 2015;34:3133–43.
59. Mansournia MA, Geroldinger A, Greenland S, Heinze G. Separation in logistic regression–causes, consequences, and control. Am J Epidemiol. 2017. doi:10.1093/aje/kwx299.
60. Shrier I. Re: the design versus the analysis of observational studies for causal effects: parallels with the design of randomized trials. Stat Med. 2008;27:2740–1.
61. Pearl J. Remarks on the method of propensity score. Stat Med. 2009;28:1415–6.
62. King G, Nielsen R. Why propensity scores should not be used for matching. Vers. 2 Feb. 2016 downloaded from http://j.mp/1FQhySn.
63. Mansson R, Joffe MM, Sun W, Hennessy S. On the estimation and use of propensity scores in case-control and case-cohort studies. Am J Epidemiol. 2007;166:332–9.
64. Austin H, Flanders WD, Rothman KJ. Bias arising in case-control studies from selection of controls from overlapping groups. Int J Epidemiol. 1989;18:713–6.