"Case-control" confusion: mislabeled reports in obstetrics and gynecology journals.
review · Level V
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 19935031.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181c03421.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
To review published articles in four U.S. obstetrics and gynecology journals labeled "case-control" studies to estimate the frequency of mislabeling the type of study. I searched PubMed from January 1970 through May 2009, using journal name and "case-control" in the title as search terms. The journals included the American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Fertility and Sterility, Journal of Reproductive Medicine, and Obstetrics & Gynecology. I reviewed the methods of each report to confirm the study design and calculated the proportion of articles labeled as "case-control" in the title that were not case-control studies. I calculated Fisher's exact 95% confidence intervals around these proportions. In the 124 reports identified, the proportion of mislabeled "case-control" studies was 30% overall. It varied from 13% to 36% in the four journals, a 2.8-fold difference in frequency (95% confidence interval 0.9-9.0). The frequency of this mislabeling appears to have increased over time. Retrospective cohort studies are often mislabeled as "case-control" studies. This misleads readers as to what was done. Researchers need better training in methods and terminology, and editors and reviewers should scrutinize more carefully manuscripts claiming to be "case-control" studies. III.
Medical subject headings
- Case-Control Studies
- Periodicals as Topic
- Research Design