Skip Navigation



American Journal of Epidemiology Advance Access published online on June 4, 2009
American Journal of Epidemiology, doi:10.1093/aje/kwp127
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
170/3/379    most recent
kwp127v1
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 arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Puumala, S. E.
Right arrow Articles by Ross, J. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Puumala, S. E.
Right arrow Articles by Ross, J. A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

American Journal of Epidemiology © The Author 2009. Published by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org.

Practice of Epidemiology

Comparability and Representativeness of Control Groups in a Case-Control Study of Infant Leukemia: A Report From the Children's Oncology Group

Susan E. Puumala, Logan G. Spector, Leslie L. Robison, Greta R. Bunin, Andrew F. Olshan, Amy M. Linabery, Michelle A. Roesler, Cindy K. Blair and Julie A. Ross

Correspondence to Dr. Julie Ross, Division of Epidemiology and Clinical Research, Department of Pediatrics, University of Minnesota, Mayo Mail Code 422, 420 Delaware Street S.E., Minneapolis, MN 55455 (e-mail: rossx014{at}umn.edu).

Received for publication February 17, 2009. Accepted for publication April 29, 2009.

Traditionally, controls in US pediatric cancer studies were selected through random digit dialing. With declining participation and lack of nonparticipant information, random digit dialing (RDD) controls may be substandard. Birth certificate (BC) controls are an alternative, because they are population based and include data from nonparticipants. The authors examined controls collected by random digit dialing and birth certificates for a Children's Oncology Group case-control study of infant leukemia in 1995–2006. Demographic variables were used to assess differences in RDD and BC controls and their representativeness. RDD and BC controls did not differ significantly with regard to maternal variables (age, race, education, marital status, alcohol during pregnancy) or child variables (sex, gestational age, birth weight), but they varied in smoking during pregnancy (22% RDD controls, 12% BC controls) (P = 0.05). The study's combined control group differed significantly from US births: Mothers of controls were more likely to be older (29.8 vs. 27.2 years), white (84% vs. 59%), and married (85% vs. 67%) and to have >16 years of education (37% vs. 25%). Control children were more often full term (88% vs. 81%) and heavier (3,436 vs. 3,317 g). Finally, participating BC mothers were likely to be older and to have more education than nonparticipants. Thus, the study's control groups were comparable but differed from the population of interest.

birth certificates; case-control studies; leukemia; pediatrics; random digit dialing; selection bias

Abbreviations: BC, birth certificate; RDD, random digit dialing


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




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.