Observational Studies

  • Paul R. Rosenbaum
Part of the Springer Series in Statistics book series (SSS)


William G. Cochran first presented “observational studies” as a topic defined by principles and methods of statistics. Cochran had been an author of the 1964 United States Surgeon General’s Advisory Committee Report, Smoking and Health, which reviewed a vast literature and concluded: “Cigarette smoking is causally related to lung cancer in men; the magnitude of the effect of cigarette smoking far outweighs all other factors. The data for women, though less extensive, point in the same direction (p. 37).” Though there had been some experiments confined to laboratory animals, the direct evidence linking smoking with human health came from observational or nonexperimental studies.


Observational Study Catholic School Hide Bias Achievement Test Score Vaginal Cancer 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Some Books and a Few Papers

  1. Blaug, M. (1980). The Methodology of Economics. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Breslow, N. and Day, N. (1980, 1987). Statistical Methods in Cancer Research, Volumes 1 and 2. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer.Google Scholar
  3. Campbell, D. and Stanley, J. (1963). Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Design for Research. Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  4. Cochran, W. (1983). Planning and Analysis of Observational Studies. New York: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cook, T. and Campbell, D. (1979). Quasi-Experimentation. Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  6. Cox, D. R. (1992). Causality: some statistical aspects. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, 155, 291–301.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Friedman, M. (1953). Essays in Positive Economics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  8. Gastwirth, J. (1988). Statistical Reasoning in Law and Public Policy. New York: Academic Press.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. Greenhouse, S. (1982). Jerome Cornfield’s contributions to epidemiology. Biometrics, 28, Supplement, 33–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Holland, P. (1986). Statistics and causal inference (with discussion). Journal of the American Statistical Association, 81, 945–970.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kelsey, J., Thompson, W., and Evans, A. (1986). Methods in Observational Epidemiology. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Kish, L. (1987). Statistical Design for Research. New York: Wiley.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lilienfeld, A. and Lilienfeld, D. (1980). Foundations of Epidemiology. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. MacMahon, B. and Pugh, T. (1970). Epidemiology. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
  15. Mantel, N. and Haenszel, W. (1959). Statistical aspects of retrospective studies of disease. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 22, 719–748.Google Scholar
  16. Meyer, M. and Fienberg, S., eds. (1992). Assessing Evaluation Studies: The Case of Bilingual Education Strategies. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  17. Miettinen, O. (1985) Theoretical Epidemiology. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  18. Rosenthal, R. and Rosnow, R., eds. (1969). Artifact in Behavioral Research. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  19. Rossi, P. and Freeman, H. (1985). Evaluation. Beverly Hills, CA: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  20. Rothman, K. (1986). Modern Epidemiology. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
  21. Rubin, D. (1974). Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 688–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Schlesselman, J. (1982). Case-Control Studies. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Suchman, E. (1967). Evaluation Research. New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  24. Susser, M. (1973). Causal Thinking in the Health Sciences: Concepts and Strategies in Epidemiology. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Tufte, E., ed. (1970). The Quantitative Analysis of Social Problems. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  26. Zellner, A. (1968). Readings in Economic Statistics and Econometrics. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
  27. Bross, I.D.J. (1960). Statistical criticism. Cancer, 13, 394–400. Reprinted in: The Quantitative Analysis of Social Problems (ed., E. Tufte). Reading, MA: AddisonWesley, pp. 97–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Cameron, E. and Pauling, L. (1976). Supplemental ascorbate in the supportive treatment of cancer: Prolongation of survival times in terminal human cancer. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA), 73, 3685–3689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Chalmers, T., Block, J., and Lee, S. (1970). Controlled studies in clinical cancer research. New England Journal of Medicine, 287, 75–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Cochran, W.G. (1965). The planning of observational studies of human populations (with Discussion). Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, 128, 134–155. Reprinted in Readings in Economic Statistics and Econometrics (ed., A. Zellner, 1968). Boston: Little Brown, pp. 11–36.Google Scholar
  31. Doll, R and Hill, A. (1966). Mortality of British doctors in relation to smoking: Observations on coronary thrombosis. In: Epidemiological Approaches to the Study of Cancer and Other Chronic Diseases, (ed., W. Haenszel). U.S. National Cancer Institute Monograph 19. Washington, DC: US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, pp. 205–268.Google Scholar
  32. Fraker, T. and Maynard, R. (1987). The adequacy of comparison group designs for evaluations of employment-related programs. Journal of Human Resources, 22, 194–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Herbst, A., Ulfelder, H., and Poskanzer, D. (1971). Adenocarcinoma of the vagina: Association of maternal stilbestrol therapy with tumor appearance in young women. New England Journal of Medicine, 284, 878–881.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hoffer, T., Greeley, A., and Coleman, J. (1985). Achievement growth in public and Catholic schools. Sociology of Education, 58, 74–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. LaLonde, R. (1986). Evaluating the econometric evaluations of training programs with experimental data. American Economic Review, 76, 604–620.Google Scholar
  36. Meier, P. (1972). The biggest public health experiment ever: The 1954 field trial of the Salk poliomyelitis vaccine. In: Statistics: A Guide to the Unknown (ed., J. Tanur). San Francisco: Hoden Day, pp. 2–13.Google Scholar
  37. Moertel, C., Fleming, T., Creagan, E., Rubin, J., O’Connell, M., and Ames, M. (1985). High-dose vitamin C versus placebo in the treatment of patients with advanced cancer who have had no prior chemotherapy: A randomized double-blind comparison. New England Journal of Medicine, 312, 137–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Popper, K. (1959). The Logic of Scientific Discovery. New York: Harper & Row.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  39. United States Surgeon General’s Advisory Committee Report, Smoking and Health. Google Scholar
  40. Wittgenstein, L. (1969). On Certainty. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  41. Zwick, R. (1991). Effects of item order and context on estimation of NAEP reading proficiency. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 10–16.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paul R. Rosenbaum
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of StatisticsUniversity of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations