You are not currently logged in.
Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
More on "Biased Selection of Controls for Case-Control Analyses of Cohort Studies"
James M. Robins, Mitchell H. Gail and Jay H. Lubin
Vol. 42, No. 2 (Jun., 1986), pp. 293-299
Published by: International Biometric Society
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2531050
Page Count: 7
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
The authors consider several aspects of the design and analysis of synthetic case-control studies of cohort data under a proportional hazards model. First, in highly stratified data, consistent estimates of the relative risk are shown to result only if controls are sampled randomly with replacement from the entire risk set or without replacement from the noncases. Second, if previous controls are excluded from consideration as future controls but are included as cases if they fail, then inconsistent estimates of the relative risk can occur if "time" in the proportional hazards model represents an individual's chronological age and age at entry into follow-up is variable. On the other hand, if "time" represents time since the beginning of follow-up, estimates of the relative risk will be consistent, but the usual variance estimator will be inconsistent.
Biometrics © 1986 International Biometric Society