ReviewAmerican journal of epidemiology2026
Use of causal inference methods in case-control studies: a methodology review.
Review in American journal of epidemiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The use of causal inference methods in cohort studies has increased considerably in recent years. However, their use has been limited in case-control studies. This report aimed at providing a detailed review of causal inference methods used in case-control studies and to review and examine their applications in previous studies. Several methods have been used to facilitate causal inference in case-control studies, including intercept-adjustment, propensity scores, and weight-based and doubly robust estimators. We used the Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online database to identify original peer-reviewed case-control studies conducted from March 2014 to March 2024 that applied these methods. We identified 418 studies, 23 of which met the inclusion criteria. Most studies involved case-control matching (individual or frequency) and included incident cases. The covariate-conditional odds ratio was the most frequently reported estimated parameter. Sixty-five percent of included studies considered an adjustment for sampling bias, most often using inverse-probability of observation weighting and case-control targeted maximum likelihood approaches. We are still in the early stages of development and application of causal inference methods for case-control studies. Their implementation and new techniques to address time-varying confounding can improve the validity of study findings and should be encouraged.
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.