Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Psychol Med. 2011 Jun;41(6):1127-31. doi: 10.1017/S0033291710001595.
Studies comparing cases with controls to uncover the causes of psychiatric disorders are common in biological research. The validity of these studies depends upon adherence to the methodological principles underlying the case-control design. However, these principles are often violated. One common practice that violates these principles is the use of well controls. In this paper we describe the bias that it can cause and discuss why the use of well controls leads to invalidity in case-control studies.
Using hypothetical numerical examples we illustrate the consequences of using well controls.
The results illustrate that the use of well controls can cause substantial bias. In no instance does the use of well controls improve validity.
We conclude that the use of well controls is an unhealthy practice in psychiatric research.
在生物研究中，比较病例和对照以揭示精神疾病病因的研究很常见。这些研究的有效性取决于对病例对照设计所依据的方法学原则的遵守。然而，这些原则经常被违反。一种常见的违反这些原则的做法是使用健康对照。在本文中，我们描述了它可能导致的偏差，并讨论了为什么使用健康对照会导致病例对照研究无效。
我们使用假设的数值示例来说明使用健康对照的后果。
结果表明，使用健康对照会导致很大的偏差。在任何情况下，使用健康对照都不能提高有效性。
我们得出结论，在精神科研究中，使用健康对照是一种不健康的做法。
Zotero 插件