Toward eradicating misconceptions on matching in etiological studies
- 239 Downloads
I read with great interest a scholarly essay by Mansournia, Jewell, and Greenland (MJG) on case–control matching . I applaud the authors’ efforts, but I believe eradication of misonceptions surrounding the topic of matching requires a more radical measure—namely, abandonment of the commonly perceived (yet conceptually untenable) duality of the principal types of etiologic study: the ‘cohort’ study and the ‘case–control’ study . But if one is not prepared to leave this duality behind, I believe it important to at least adopt the modern conceptions of these studies, as their original conceptions have considerably evolved in the last few decades [2, 3].
MJG do not define ‘cohort’ or ‘case–control’ studies in their essay, and although they do mention “many protocols for selecting controls,” the fact that the authors view ‘cohort matching’ as matching “across exposure groups” and case–control matching as matching “across outcome groups” and do not invoke the centrally-important...
- 4.Porta M (Editor), Greenland S, Last JM (Associate Editors). A dictionary of epidemiology. 5th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008.Google Scholar