Abstract
Matching is an option for control that is available at the study design stage. We previously introduced matching in Chapter 13. We suggest that you review that chapter before proceeding further with this chapter. The primary goal of matching is to gain precision in estimating the measure of effect of interest. There are other advantages to matching as well, and there are disadvantages. In this chapter, we define matching in general terms, describe different types of matching, discuss the issue of whether to match or not match, and describe how to analyze matched data.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
References on Matching
Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume 1. The Analysis of Case-Control Studies. International Agency for Research in Cancer, Lyon, 1980.
Brock KE, Berry G, Mock PA, MacLennan R, Truswell AS, Brinton LA. Nutrients in diet and plasma and risk of in situ cervical cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1988 Jun 15;80(8):580–5.
Diaz T, Nunez JC, Rullan JW, Markowitz LE, Barker ND, Horan J. Risk factors associated with severe measles in Puerto Rico. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1992;11(10):836–40. (Example of frequency matching)
Donovan JW, MacLennan R, Adena M. Vietnam service and the risk of congenital anomalies. A case-control study. Med J Aust 1984;140(7):394–7.
Halpin TJ, Holtzhauer FJ, Campbell RJ, Hall LJ, Correa-Villasenor A, Lanese R, Rice J, Hurwitz ES. Reye’s syndrome and medication use. JAMA 1982;248(6):687–91.
Kleinbaum DG, Klein M. Logistic Regression: A Self-Learning Text, 2nd Ed. Springer Verlag Publishers, 2002.
Kleinbaum DG, Kupper LL, Morgenstern H. Epidemiologic Research: Principles and Quantitative Methods. John Wiley and Sons Publishers, New York, 1982.
Kupper LL, Karon JM, Kleinbaum DG, Morgenstern H, Lewis DK, Matching in epidemiologic studies: validity and efficiency considerations. Biometrics 1981;37(2):271–291.
McNeil D. Epidemiologic Research Methods. John Wiley and Sons Publishers, 1996. (Example of pair matching in a cohort study)
Miettinen OS. Individual matching with multiple controls in the case of all-or-none responses. Biometrics 1969;25(2):339–55.
Miettinen OS. Estimation of relative risk from individually matched series. Biometrics 1970;26(1):75–86.
Ury HK. Efficiency of case-control studies with multiple controls per case: continuous or dichotomous data. Biometrics 1975;31(3):643–9.
Case-Crossover Design
Maclure M, Mittleman MA. Should we use a case-crossover design? Annu Rev Public Health 2000;21:193–221.
Maclure M. The case-crossover design: a method for studying transient effects on the risk of acute events. Am J Epidemiol 1991;133(2):144–53.
Redelmeier DA, Tibshirani RJ. Association between cellular-telephone calls and motor vehicle collisions. N Engl J Med 1997;336(7):453–8.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2007 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
(2007). Matching - Seems Easy, But not that Easy. In: A Pocket Guide to Epidemiology. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-45966-0_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-45966-0_15
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-0-387-45964-6
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-45966-0
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)