Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Case–control studies in diabetes. Do they really use a case–control design?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Acta Diabetologica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Aims

Studies defined as case–control do not always use this design. We aimed to estimate the frequency of mislabelled case–control studies in published articles in the area of diabetes and to identify the predictors of incorrect labelling.

Methods

We searched Medline and Web of Science for articles with “diabetes” and “case control” in title and filtered for language (English/Romance) and period (January 2010–December 2014). Inclusion criteria were: (1) statement to use a case–control design in title, (2) to be a final full-length publication and (3) to have original data in the area of diabetes. Three independent reviewers went through titles, looked for full texts and reviewed them. Discrepancies were settled with a fourth reviewer. Expert epidemiologist advice was requested in case of doubt. Outcome variable: case–control mislabelling; addressed predictors: publication year, journal impact factor and journal subject. Statistics: proportion of mislabelled CC articles and assessment of predictors by multivariate logistic regression analysis.

Results

We retrieved 362 articles, 251 of them fulfilling inclusion criteria. The proportion of mislabelled CC studies was 43.8% (confidence interval 95% 37.7–50.0%). Most mislabelled studies had a cross-sectional design (82.7%). Predictors of mislabelling were publication year, journal impact factor and journal area.

Conclusions

A relevant subset of studies defined as case–control in the area of diabetes correspond to mislabelled cross-sectional studies. Incorrect labelling misleads readers regarding the interpretation of results and the cause–effect hypothesis. Researchers, reviewers and editors should be aware of and commit to settle this issue.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Rothman K, Lash T, Greenland S (2008) Modern epidemiology, 3rd edn. Wolters Kluwer, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  2. D’Souza G, Kreimer AR, Viscidi R et al (2007) Case-control study of human papillomavirus and oropharyngeal cancer. N Engl J Med 356:1944–1956

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Grimes DA (2009) ‘Case-control’ confusion: Mislabeled reports in obstetrics and gynecology journals. Obstet Gynecol 114:1284–1286

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Mayo NE, Goldberg MS (2009) When is a case-control study not a case-control study? J Rehabil Med 41:209–216

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Altman DG (2002) Poor-quality medical research: what can journals do? JAMA 287:2765–2767

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ubriani R, Smith N, Katz KA (2007) Reporting of study design in titles and abstracts of articles published in clinically oriented dermatology journals. Br J Dermatol 156:557–559

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Garfield E (1999) Journal impact factor: a brief review. CMAJ Can Med Assoc J 161:979–980

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Reynolds JC, Menegazzi JJ, Yealy DM (2012) Emergency medicine journal impact factor and change compared to other medical and surgical specialties. Acad Emerg Med 19:1248–1254

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

Author contribution

A.R. collected the data, performed the statistical analysis and interpreted the results, and drafted the manuscript. L.M. collected the data, contributed to the interpretation of results, and provided input to the manuscript. F.R. collected the data, contributed to the interpretation of results, and provided input to the manuscript. T.P. supervised the analysis, contributed to the interpretation of results, and provided input to the manuscript. I.B. supervised the analysis, contributed to the interpretation of results, and provided input to the manuscript. R.C. designed the study, collected the data, performed the statistical analysis and interpretation of results, and provided input to the manuscript. R.C. is the guarantor of this work and, as such, had full access to all the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. All authors have read and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Servei d’Endocrinologia i Nutrició, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Sant Antoni Mª Claret, 167, 08025, Barcelona, Spain

    Analía Ramos, Lilian Cristina Mendoza, Fernanda Rabasa & Rosa Corcoy

  2. Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Public Health, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Barcelona, Spain

    Ignasi Bolíbar & Teresa Puig

  3. Institut d’Investigació Biomédica Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau), Barcelona, Spain

    Ignasi Bolíbar, Teresa Puig & Rosa Corcoy

  4. Department of Pediatrics, Obstetrics and Gynecology an Preventive Medicine, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain

    Ignasi Bolíbar & Teresa Puig

  5. CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Madrid, Spain

    Ignasi Bolíbar

  6. Red de investigación Cardiovascular (RIC), Madrid, Spain

    Teresa Puig

  7. Departament of Medicine, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain

    Rosa Corcoy

  8. Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Bioingeniería, Biomateriales y Nanomedicina (CIBER-BBN), Madrid, Spain

    Rosa Corcoy

Authors
  1. Analía Ramos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lilian Cristina Mendoza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fernanda Rabasa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ignasi Bolíbar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Teresa Puig
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Rosa Corcoy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rosa Corcoy.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors confirm that they do not have any known conflicts of interest associated with this work and there has been no financial support for this work that could have influenced its outcome.

Human and animal rights

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by the any of the authors.

Informed consent

None.

Additional information

Managed by Massimo Porta.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ramos, A., Mendoza, L.C., Rabasa, F. et al. Case–control studies in diabetes. Do they really use a case–control design?. Acta Diabetol 54, 631–634 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00592-016-0957-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00592-016-0957-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation