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 (35)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lete, C.
Right arrow Articles by Thomas, D. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Lete, C.
Right arrow Articles by Thomas, D. B.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

American Journal of Epidemiology Vol. 140, No. 7: 643-648
Copyright © 1994 by The Johns Hopkins University School of Hygiene and Public Health


research-article

Comparison of Control Subjects Recruited by Random Digit Dialing and Area Survey

Chitra Lete1, Elizabeth A. Holly1,2, Diane S. Roseman3 and David B. Thomas4

1Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, CA
2Department of Health Research and Policy, School of Medicine, Stanford University Stanford, CA
3Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health and Community Medicine, University of Washington Seattle, WA
4Program in Epidemiology, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center Seattle, WA

Although random digit dialing (RDD) is an accepted and commonly used method of sampling populations for controls in case-control studies, there have been surprisingly few attempts to compare the accuracy of RDD with that of the best traditional alternative, i.e., household area surveys. The aim of the present study was to compare a variety of characteristics of control subjects selected by ROD and area survey methods. All data were gathered through in-person interviews of both types of control subjects. The area survey identified a population-based sample of 20- to 79-year-old residents of two Washington State counties in 1978 and 1979. Control groups for three case-control studies of bladder cancer, gynecologic cancers, and multiple myeloma were drawn from this area sample, for a total of 240 control subjects. Controls aged 21-64 years from the same counties were identified for the National Bladder Cancer Study using ROD telephone sampling during the same time period. There were 134 respondents in the ADD control group. Overall, the two control groups selected by these two different methods yielded similar estimated frequencies of various population characteristics. The small differences observed in some age/sex subgroups and the statistical significance of the overall measure of association for occupational exposure to organic substances may be attributed to multiple compar isons.

case-control studies; data collection; epidemiologic methods


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
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
G. J. Tranah, E. A. Holly, and P. M. Bracci
Solvent Exposure and Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma: No Risk in a Population-Based Study in the San Francisco Bay Area
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., November 1, 2009; 18(11): 3130 - 3132.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
P. M. Bracci, T. B. Dalvi, and E. A. Holly
Residential history, family characteristics and non-hodgkin lymphoma, a population-based case-control study in the san francisco bay area.
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., July 1, 2006; 15(7): 1287 - 1294.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
D. R. Skibola, M. T. Smith, P. M. Bracci, A. E. Hubbard, L. Agana, S. Chi, and E. A. Holly
Polymorphisms in Ghrelin and Neuropeptide Y Genes Are Associated with Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., May 1, 2005; 14(5): 1251 - 1256.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am J EpidemiolHome page
C. Steinmaus, Y. Yuan, M. N. Bates, and A. H. Smith
Case-Control Study of Bladder Cancer and Drinking Water Arsenic in the Western United States
Am. J. Epidemiol., December 15, 2003; 158(12): 1193 - 1201.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am J EpidemiolHome page
E. A. Holly and P. M. Bracci
Population-based Study of Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma, Histology, and Medical History among Human Immunodeficiency Virus-negative Participants in San Francisco
Am. J. Epidemiol., August 15, 2003; 158(4): 316 - 327.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Epidemiol RevHome page
E. J. Chow and E. A. Holly
Blood Transfusions and Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma
Epidemiol. Rev., December 1, 2002; 24(2): 269 - 279.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am J EpidemiolHome page
N. C. Briggs, R. S. Levine, L. D. Bobo, W. P. Haliburton, E. A. Brann, and C. H. Hennekens
Wine Drinking and Risk of Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma among Men in the United States: A Population-based Case-Control Study
Am. J. Epidemiol., September 1, 2002; 156(5): 454 - 462.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
N. C. Briggs, R. S. Levine, and E. A. Brann
Allergies and Risk of Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma by Subtype
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., April 1, 2002; 11(4): 401 - 407.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am J EpidemiolHome page
D. J. Brogan, M. M. Denniston, J. M. Liff, E. W. Flagg, R. J. Coates, and L. A. Brinton
Comparison of Telephone Sampling and Area Sampling: Response Rates and Within-Household Coverage
Am. J. Epidemiol., June 1, 2001; 153(11): 1119 - 1127.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Stat Methods Med ResHome page
S. Wacholder
Design issues in case-control studies
Statistical Methods in Medical Research, December 1, 1995; 4(4): 293 - 309.
[Abstract] [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.