Abstract

BackgroundCase-control designs are an important yet commonly misunderstood tool in the epidemiologist’s arsenal for causal inference. We reconsider classical concepts, assumptions and principles and explore when the results of case-control studies can be endowed a causal interpretation.ResultsWe establish how, and under which conditions, various causal estimands relating to intention-to-treat or per-protocol effects can be identified based on the data that are collected under popular sampling schemes (case-base, survivor, and risk-set sampling, with or without matching). We present a concise summary of our identification results that link the estimands to the (distribution of the) available data and articulate under which conditions these links hold.ConclusionThe modern epidemiologist’s arsenal for causal inference is well-suited to make transparent for case-control designs what assumptions are necessary or sufficient to endow the respective study results with a causal interpretation and, in turn, help resolve or prevent misunderstanding. Our approach may inform future research on different estimands, other variations of the case-control design or settings with additional complexities.

Highlights

  • ResultsUnder which conditions, various causal estimands relating to intention-to-treat or perprotocol effects can be identified based on the data that are collected under popular sampling schemes (case-base, survivor, and risk-set sampling, with or without matching)

  • In causal inference, it is important that the causal question of interest is unambiguously articulated [1]

  • A notable exception is given by Dickerman et al [3], who recently outlined an application of trial emulation with case-control designs to statin use and colorectal cancer

Read more

Summary

Results

Under which conditions, various causal estimands relating to intention-to-treat or perprotocol effects can be identified based on the data that are collected under popular sampling schemes (case-base, survivor, and risk-set sampling, with or without matching). We present a concise summary of our identification results that link the estimands to the (distribution of the) available data and articulate under which conditions these links hold

Conclusion
Introduction
Take the ratio of the results of steps 3 and 4
Discussion
Take the ratio of the results of steps 1 and 2
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call