Comparison of Estimates between Cohort and Case-Control Studies in Meta-Analyses of Therapeutic Interventions: A Meta-Epidemiological Study.
BACKGROUND:Observational studies are increasingly being used for assessing therapeutic interventions. Case-control studies are generally considered to have greater risk of bias than cohort studies, but we lack evidence of differences in effect estimates between the 2 study types. We aimed to compare...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2016-01-01
|
| Series: | PLoS ONE |
| Online Access: | http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4861326?pdf=render |
| _version_ | 1811201959658520576 |
|---|---|
| author | Amy Lanza Philippe Ravaud Carolina Riveros Agnes Dechartres |
| author_facet | Amy Lanza Philippe Ravaud Carolina Riveros Agnes Dechartres |
| author_sort | Amy Lanza |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | BACKGROUND:Observational studies are increasingly being used for assessing therapeutic interventions. Case-control studies are generally considered to have greater risk of bias than cohort studies, but we lack evidence of differences in effect estimates between the 2 study types. We aimed to compare estimates between cohort and case-control studies in meta-analyses of observational studies of therapeutic interventions by using a meta-epidemiological study. METHODS:We used a random sample of meta-analyses of therapeutic interventions published in 2013 that included both cohort and case-control studies assessing a binary outcome. For each meta-analysis, the ratio of estimates (RE) was calculated by comparing the estimate in case-control studies to that in cohort studies. Then, we used random-effects meta-analysis to estimate a combined RE across meta-analyses. An RE < 1 indicated that case-control studies yielded larger estimates than cohort studies. RESULTS:The final analysis included 23 meta-analyses: 138 cohort and 133 case-control studies. Treatment effect estimates did not significantly differ between case-control and cohort studies (combined RE 0.97 [95% CI 0.86-1.09]). Heterogeneity was low, with between-meta-analysis variance τ2 = 0.0049. Estimates did not differ between case-control and prospective or retrospective cohort studies (RE = 1.05 [95% CI 0.96-1.15] and RE = 0.99 [95% CI, 0.83-1.19], respectively). Sensitivity analysis of studies reporting adjusted estimates also revealed no significant difference (RE = 1.03 [95% CI 0.91-1.16]). Heterogeneity was also low for these analyses. CONCLUSION:We found no significant difference in treatment effect estimates between case-control and cohort studies assessing therapeutic interventions. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-12T02:30:42Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-2473e6eb2dbb498584589ce7c69b8f5e |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1932-6203 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-12T02:30:42Z |
| publishDate | 2016-01-01 |
| publisher | Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
| record_format | Article |
| series | PLoS ONE |
| spelling | doaj.art-2473e6eb2dbb498584589ce7c69b8f5e2022-12-22T03:51:47ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032016-01-01115e015487710.1371/journal.pone.0154877Comparison of Estimates between Cohort and Case-Control Studies in Meta-Analyses of Therapeutic Interventions: A Meta-Epidemiological Study.Amy LanzaPhilippe RavaudCarolina RiverosAgnes DechartresBACKGROUND:Observational studies are increasingly being used for assessing therapeutic interventions. Case-control studies are generally considered to have greater risk of bias than cohort studies, but we lack evidence of differences in effect estimates between the 2 study types. We aimed to compare estimates between cohort and case-control studies in meta-analyses of observational studies of therapeutic interventions by using a meta-epidemiological study. METHODS:We used a random sample of meta-analyses of therapeutic interventions published in 2013 that included both cohort and case-control studies assessing a binary outcome. For each meta-analysis, the ratio of estimates (RE) was calculated by comparing the estimate in case-control studies to that in cohort studies. Then, we used random-effects meta-analysis to estimate a combined RE across meta-analyses. An RE < 1 indicated that case-control studies yielded larger estimates than cohort studies. RESULTS:The final analysis included 23 meta-analyses: 138 cohort and 133 case-control studies. Treatment effect estimates did not significantly differ between case-control and cohort studies (combined RE 0.97 [95% CI 0.86-1.09]). Heterogeneity was low, with between-meta-analysis variance τ2 = 0.0049. Estimates did not differ between case-control and prospective or retrospective cohort studies (RE = 1.05 [95% CI 0.96-1.15] and RE = 0.99 [95% CI, 0.83-1.19], respectively). Sensitivity analysis of studies reporting adjusted estimates also revealed no significant difference (RE = 1.03 [95% CI 0.91-1.16]). Heterogeneity was also low for these analyses. CONCLUSION:We found no significant difference in treatment effect estimates between case-control and cohort studies assessing therapeutic interventions.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4861326?pdf=render |
| spellingShingle | Amy Lanza Philippe Ravaud Carolina Riveros Agnes Dechartres Comparison of Estimates between Cohort and Case-Control Studies in Meta-Analyses of Therapeutic Interventions: A Meta-Epidemiological Study. PLoS ONE |
| title | Comparison of Estimates between Cohort and Case-Control Studies in Meta-Analyses of Therapeutic Interventions: A Meta-Epidemiological Study. |
| title_full | Comparison of Estimates between Cohort and Case-Control Studies in Meta-Analyses of Therapeutic Interventions: A Meta-Epidemiological Study. |
| title_fullStr | Comparison of Estimates between Cohort and Case-Control Studies in Meta-Analyses of Therapeutic Interventions: A Meta-Epidemiological Study. |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Estimates between Cohort and Case-Control Studies in Meta-Analyses of Therapeutic Interventions: A Meta-Epidemiological Study. |
| title_short | Comparison of Estimates between Cohort and Case-Control Studies in Meta-Analyses of Therapeutic Interventions: A Meta-Epidemiological Study. |
| title_sort | comparison of estimates between cohort and case control studies in meta analyses of therapeutic interventions a meta epidemiological study |
| url | http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4861326?pdf=render |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT amylanza comparisonofestimatesbetweencohortandcasecontrolstudiesinmetaanalysesoftherapeuticinterventionsametaepidemiologicalstudy AT philipperavaud comparisonofestimatesbetweencohortandcasecontrolstudiesinmetaanalysesoftherapeuticinterventionsametaepidemiologicalstudy AT carolinariveros comparisonofestimatesbetweencohortandcasecontrolstudiesinmetaanalysesoftherapeuticinterventionsametaepidemiologicalstudy AT agnesdechartres comparisonofestimatesbetweencohortandcasecontrolstudiesinmetaanalysesoftherapeuticinterventionsametaepidemiologicalstudy |