The basic epidemiological study designs are cross-sectional, case-control, and cohort studies. Cross-sectional studies provide a snapshot of a population by determining both exposures and outcomes at one time point. Cohort studies identify the study groups based on the exposure and, then, the researchers follow up study participants to measure outcomes. Case-control studies identify the study groups based on the outcome, and the researchers retrospectively collect the exposure of interest. The present chapter discusses the basic concepts, the advantages, and disadvantages of epidemiological study designs and their systematic biases, including selection bias, information bias, and confounding.
Bias Case-control study Cohort study Confounding Information bias Observational studies Selection bias Study design
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Springer Nature is developing a new tool to find and evaluate Protocols. Learn more
Porta M (ed) (2014) A dictionary of epidemiology. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Grimes DA, Schulz KF (2002) Descriptive studies: what they can and cannot do. Lancet (London, England). 359:145–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grimes DA, Schulz KF (2002) Cohort studies: marching towards outcomes. Lancet (London, England). 359:341–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ioannidis JPA, Munafò MR, Fusar-Poli P et al (2014) Publication and other reporting biases in cognitive sciences: detection, prevalence, and prevention. Trends Cogn Sci 18:235–241CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
Evangelou E, Ioannidis JPA (2013) Meta-analysis methods for genome-wide association studies and beyond. Nat Rev Genet 14:379–389CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Grimes DA, Schulz KF (2002) Bias and causal associations in observational research. Lancet (London, England) 359:248–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordis L (2014) Case-control and other study designs. In: Epidemiology. Saunders, Philadelphia, pp 189–214Google Scholar
Schulz KF, Grimes DA (2002) Case-control studies: research in reverse. Lancet (London, England). 359:431–434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parr CL, Hjartåker A, Laake P et al (2009) Recall bias in melanoma risk factors and measurement error effects: a nested case-control study within the Norwegian women and Cancer study. Am J Epidemiol 169:257–266CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Wacholder S, Silverman DT, McLaughlin JK et al (1992) Selection of controls in case-control studies. III. Design options. Am J Epidemiol 135:1042–1050CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Rothman K, Greenland S, Lash T (2008) Validity in epidemiologic studies. In: Modern epidemiology. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, pp 128–148Google Scholar