Hernández-Díaz Sonia, Hernán Miguel A, Meyer Katie, Werler Martha M, Mitchell Allen A
Slone Epidemiology Center, Boston University School of Public Health, 1010 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
Am J Epidemiol. 2003 Aug 15;158(4):385-91. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwg144.
The case-crossover and the case-time-control designs can be used to evaluate the effect of intermittent exposures on the risk of acute events. To explore how birth defects epidemiology could benefit from these approaches, the authors compared them with a traditional case-control study design that evaluated the association between use of folic acid antagonists during the second and third pregnancy months and the risk of cardiovascular defects. Among 3,870 cases and 8,387 control infants in the Slone Epidemiology Center Birth Defects Study (1976-1998), the odds ratio was 2.3 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.4, 3.9). The case-crossover approach compared folic acid antagonist use between the 2-month embryologically sensitive period (case window) and the 2 months preceding the last menstrual period (control window) among mothers of case infants (odds ratio = 1.0, 95% CI: 0.5, 2.0). Although it controls between-person confounding and avoids issues of control selection, this design may be biased by time trends of exposure prevalence during pregnancy. The case-time-control design, which adjusts for exposure time trends under certain assumptions, yielded an odds ratio of 2.9 (95% CI: 1.2, 7.2), but it requires controls. In the presence of gestational time trends of exposure, the new designs do not offer clear advantages over the case-control design.
病例交叉设计和病例-时间对照设计可用于评估间歇性暴露对急性事件风险的影响。为了探究出生缺陷流行病学如何从这些方法中获益,作者将它们与一种传统病例对照研究设计进行了比较,该传统设计评估了妊娠第二和第三个月期间使用叶酸拮抗剂与心血管缺陷风险之间的关联。在斯隆流行病学中心出生缺陷研究(1976 - 1998年)的3870例病例和8387例对照婴儿中,比值比为2.3(95%置信区间(CI):1.4,3.9)。病例交叉方法比较了病例婴儿母亲在胚胎学敏感的2个月期间(病例窗口)和末次月经前2个月(对照窗口)使用叶酸拮抗剂的情况(比值比 = 1.0,95% CI:0.5,2.0)。尽管该设计控制了个体间的混杂因素并避免了对照选择问题,但它可能因孕期暴露患病率的时间趋势而产生偏差。病例-时间对照设计在某些假设下对暴露时间趋势进行了调整,得出的比值比为2.9(95% CI:1.2,7.2),但它需要对照。在存在暴露的妊娠时间趋势时,新设计相对于病例对照设计并没有明显优势。