...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Annals of epidemiology >An empirical study of the use of living versus deceased study subjects: associations with liver cancer in the selected cancers study.
【24h】

An empirical study of the use of living versus deceased study subjects: associations with liver cancer in the selected cancers study.

机译：使用活着的与死去的研究对象的实证研究：所选癌症研究中与肝癌的关系。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

PURPOSE: In case-control studies, the issue of whether living or deceased controls should be used for deceased cases has been controversial. METHODS: Using data from a study of cancer among men that selected both live (n = 1910) and deceased controls (n = 596) for cases of liver cancer (109 deceased, 59 living), we examined the effects of using information from proxy respondents (cases and controls) and from live cases and controls on associations between liver cancer and known risk factors. Cases diagnosed between 1984 and 1988 were selected from eight population-based cancer registries. Live controls were recruited by random digit dialing, deceased controls from death certificate files. Controls were matched to cases on geographic area, year-of-birth, and race. RESULTS: Adjusted odds ratios (OR) calculated for deceased cases and controls, when compared to odds ratios for live cases and controls, were attenuated towards the null value for history of hepatitis (4.7 vs. 14.9), blood transfusions (1.1 vs. 7.8), and cirrhosis (9.3 vs. 51.1). When all cases and living controls were used, odds ratios did not differ substantially from those for living cases and controls except for cirrhosis (OR = 154.2). For smoking, the odds ratios were similar in all analyses. Adjustment for type of interview (self, proxy) did not eliminate differences between results for living and deceased subjects; significant interactions were found between type of interview and hepatitis, cirrhosis, and blood transfusions. CONCLUSIONS: Selection of live controls for deceased cases is recommended to decrease misclassification in measures of exposure.
机译：目的：在病例对照研究中，对于死者病例应使用活体对照还是已死对照是一个有争议的问题。方法：使用一项针对男性癌症研究的数据，该男性针对肝癌病例（109例死亡，59例活着）选择了活检（n = 1910）和死者对照（n = 596），我们研究了使用代理人信息的效果受访者（病例和对照）以及肝癌和已知危险因素之间的关联的活体病例和对照。 1984年至1988年之间诊断出的病例选自8个基于人群的癌症登记处。通过随机数字拨号招募了现场控制人员，这些人员已从死亡证明文件中死亡。对照与地理区域，出生年份和种族的病例相匹配。结果：与死者病例和对照者的比值比相比，已故病例和对照者的调整后比值比（OR）降低至肝炎病史（4.7比14.9），输血（1.1比7.8）的零值。 ）和肝硬化（9.3比51.1）。当使用所有病例和生活对照时，除了肝硬化以外，优势比与生活病例和对照的比值没有显着差异（OR = 154.2）。对于吸烟，所有分析中的优势比均相似。访谈类型（自我，代理人）的调整并不能消除在世和死者的结果之间的差异;发现访谈类型与肝炎，肝硬化和输血之间存在显着的相互作用。结论：建议为死者选择活体对照，以减少暴露量的误分类。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号