Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (36)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by MOSS, S M
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by MOSS, S M
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 1991 Oxford University Press

review-article

Case-Control Studies of Screening

S M MOSS

Department of Health Cancer Screening Evaluation Unit, Institute of Cancer Research, Section of Epidemiology 15 Cotswold Road, Sutton, Surrey SM2 5NG, U.K.

The application of case-control studies to the evaluation of screening data presents a number of potential problems. In particular, the results are liable to be affected by selection bias. Published case-control studies of breast cancer screening are reviewed in the light of the results of a recent UK study of somewhat different design which attempts to estimate the effect of selection bias.

Case-control studies of cervical screening involve additional difficulties, such as the handling of cases of invasive disease diagnosed by screening, and the distinction between diagnostic and screening smears. The extent to which published studies have addressed these is discussed. It is concluded that case-control studies of screening should be interpreted with caution, particularly in situations where comparable data from controlled trails are not available.

Revised 1 August 1990


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Am J EpidemiolHome page
A. R. Localio, L. Zhou, and S. A. Norman
Measuring Screening Intensity in Case-Control Studies of the Efficacy of Mammography
Am. J. Epidemiol., August 1, 2006; 164(3): 272 - 281.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 BMJHome page
A. E Raffle
Cervical screening
BMJ, May 29, 2004; 328(7451): 1272 - 1273.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ANN INTERN MEDHome page
L. L. Humphrey, S. Teutsch, and M. Johnson
Lung Cancer Screening with Sputum Cytologic Examination, Chest Radiography, and Computed Tomography: An Update for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force
Ann Intern Med, May 4, 2004; 140(9): 740 - 753.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Int J EpidemiolHome page
A. Raffle
Commentary: Case-control studies of screening should carry a health warning
Int. J. Epidemiol., August 1, 2003; 32(4): 577 - 578.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 BMJHome page
J. E C W Verne, R. Aubrey, S. B Love, I. C Talbot, and J. M A Northover
Population based randomised study of uptake and yield of screening by flexible sigmoidoscopy compared with screening by faecal occult blood testing
BMJ, July 18, 1998; 317(7152): 182 - 185.
[Abstract] [Full Text]

Home page
 Prog Hum GeogrHome page
K. Jones and G. Moon
Medical geography: taking space seriously
Progress in Human Geography, December 1, 1993; 17(4): 515 - 524.
[PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.