ArticleAmerican journal of epidemiology2025
Modern sources of controls in case-control studies.
Article in American journal of epidemiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diabetes mellitus and risk of endometrial cancer: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.Acta diabetologica · 2026Review
- Higher sun exposure is associated with a reduced risk of primary biliary cholangitis.International journal of epidemiology · 2026Article
- When air gets heavy: joint PMFrontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In 1992, Wacholder et al. developed a theoretical framework for case-control studies to minimize bias in control selection. They described 3 comparability principles (study base, deconfounding, and comparable accuracy) to reduce the potential for selection bias, confounding, and information bias in case-control studies. Wacholder et al. explained how these principles apply to traditional sources of control participants for case-control studies, including population controls, hospital controls, controls from a medical practice, friend or relative controls, and deceased controls. The goal of the present article is to extend this seminal work on case-control studies by providing a modern perspective on sources of control participants. Today, there are many more potential sources of control participants s for case-control studies than there were in the 1990s. This is due to technological advances in computing power, internet access, and availability of "big data" resources. These advances have vastly expanded the quantity and diversity of data available for case-control studies. We discuss control selection from electronic health records, health insurance claims databases, publicly available online data sources, and social media-based data. We focus on practical considerations for unbiased control selection, emphasizing the strengths and weaknesses of each modern source of controls for case-control studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.