Abstract
BackgroundCorrect control selection is crucial to the internal validity of case-control studies. Little information exists on differences between population and hospital controls in case-control studies on cancers in Chinese hospital setting.MethodsWe conducted three parallel case-control studies on leukemia, breast and colorectal cancers in China between 2009 and 2010, using population and hospital controls to separately match 540 incident cases by age, gender and residency at a 1:1 ratio. Demographic and lifestyle factors were measured using a validated questionnaire in face-to-face interview. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were obtained using conditional logistic regression analyses.ResultsThe two control groups had closely similar exposure distributions of 15 out of 16 factors, with the only exception being that hospital controls were less likely to have a BMI ≥ 25 (OR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.54, 0.93). For exposure of green tea drinking, the adjusted ORs (95% CIs) comparing green tealeaves intake ≥ 1000 grams annually with non-drinkers were 0.51 (0.31, 0.83) and 0.21 (0.27, 0.74) for three cancers combined, 0.06 (0.01, 0.61) and 0.07 (0.01, 0.47) for breast cancer, 0.52 (0.29, 0.94) and 0.45 (0.25, 0.82) for colorectal cancer, 0.65 (0.08, 5.63) and 0.57 (0.07, 4.79) for leukemia using hospital and population controls respectively.ConclusionsThe study found that hospital controls were comparable with population controls for most demographic characteristics and lifestyle factors measured, but there was a slight difference between the two control groups. Hospital outpatients provide a satisfactory control group in hospital-based case-control study in the Chinese hospital setting.
Highlights
Correct control selection is crucial to the internal validity of case-control studies
When we applied successfully to Australia’s National Health and Medical Research Council to perform casecontrol studies in China on the effects of green tea on the incidence rates of colorectal cancer, breast cancer and adult leukemia, it became a condition of funding that we recruit both hospital and population controls for around one fifth of the case series to determine if there was any difference of practical importance
This study aimed, to compare key exposure distributions between hospital controls and alternative population controls to determine if there was any difference of practical importance, and to examine if inferences drawn from green tea effect estimates for different cancer case groups using hospital controls would be different from those using population controls in the Chinese hospital setting
Summary
Correct control selection is crucial to the internal validity of case-control studies. The function of controls is to provide valid information on the distribution of exposure within the population at risk of becoming a case [1]. When we applied successfully to Australia’s National Health and Medical Research Council to perform casecontrol studies in China on the effects of green tea on the incidence rates of colorectal cancer, breast cancer and adult leukemia, it became a condition of funding that we recruit both hospital and population controls for around one fifth of the case series to determine if there was any difference of practical importance. When researchers have enrolled both hospital and population controls, differences in effect estimates using the two groups have varied from inconsequential [6,7] to problematic [8-10], prompting discussions about characteristics of the exposure, selection protocols and clinical dynamics. Some studies have reported differences between hospital and population controls in key exposure distributions [11-14], but elsewhere the two control groups were found to have very similar exposure distributions [15]
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have