Abstract
In cohort studies, subjects are followed in a forward direction from exposure to outcome, and inferential reasoning is from cause to effect. In case-control studies, subjects are investigated in a backward direction from outcome to exposure; inference is from effect to cause. In cross-sectional studies, the exposure and outcome are both determined at the same point, or cross section, in time [1]. (Hence, another name for this design is prevalence study.) Cross-sectional studies share many of the features of case-control studies. They carry an additional disadvantage, however; since exposure is ascertained at the same point in time as the outcome, the investigator cannot be certain that exposure preceded outcome. As we shall see, this disadvantage has important implications for causal inference.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Kramer MS, Boivin J-F (1987) Toward an “unconfounded” classification of epidemiologic research design. J Chronic Dis 40: 683–688
Susser MW (1969) Aging and the field of public health. In: Riley MW, Riley JW, Johnson M (eds) Aging and society. Russell Sage Foundation, New York, pp 137–146
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1988 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kramer, M.S. (1988). Cross-Sectional Studies. In: Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-61372-2_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-61372-2_9
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-64814-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-61372-2
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive