97
Presenter’s Name Date Cross Sectional Studies Son Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Cross Sectional Studies Son Hee Jung 2013/03/25

  • Upload
    bernie

  • View
    95

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Cross Sectional Studies Son Hee Jung 2013/03/25. Type of Epidemiological Studies. Type of studyAlternative nameUnit Experimental RCT clinical trialindividuals Observational Ecological correlationalpopulation Cross sectionalprevalence individuals - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Cross Sectional Studies

Son Hee Jung

2013/03/25

Page 2: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Type of Epidemiological StudiesType of study Alternative name Unit

ExperimentalRCT clinical trial individuals

ObservationalEcological correlational popu-

lationCross sectional prevalence individualsCase-control case-reference indi-

vidualsCohort follow up individuals

Page 3: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Study Designs & Corresponding Ques-tions

• Cross-sectional How common is this disease

or condition?• Ecologic What explains

differences between groups?

• Case-control What factors are associated

with having a disease?

• Prospective How many people will get the disease?

What factors predict development?

Page 4: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Contents

• Definition• Basic approach• Advantage & disadvantage• Sampling• Measures of disease – Prevalence

• Bias

Page 5: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Cross-sectional study-definition

Page 6: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

연구대상 집단

요인 노출과 질환에 관한 정보 수집한 시점

연구 진행

Cross Sectional Study

Page 7: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Cross-sectional study- Characteristics

Page 8: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Basic approach

• Include a sample of all persons in a popula-tion at a given time without regard to ex-posure or disease status

• Typically exposure and diseases assessed at that one time

• Exposure subpopulations can be compared with respect to disease prevalence

Page 9: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Basic approach

• For some questions, temporal ordering be-tween exposure and disease is clear and cross sectional studies can test hypothesis– Example: genotype, blood type

• When temporal ordering is not clear can be used to examine relations between expo-sure and outcomes descriptively, and to generate hypotheses

• Can combine a cross sectional study with follow up to create a cohort study

Page 10: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Basic approach

• Issues with addressing etiology– Temporal ordering between exposure

and outcome cannot be assured– Length biased sampling• Cases with long duration will be over

represented

Page 11: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Cross -Sectional Studies: Advantages

• Inexpensive for common diseases• Should be able to get a better response

rate than other study designs• Relatively short study duration• Can be addressed to specific populations

of interest

Page 12: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Cross-Sectional Studies : Disadvan-tages

• Unsuitable for rare or short duration dis-eases

• High refusal rate may make accurate prevalence estimates impossible

• More expensive and time consuming than case-control studies

• No data on temporal relationship between risk factors and disease development

Page 13: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Why sample?

Page 14: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Sampling from the source population

Page 15: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Non-probability sampling• Common convenience sampling methods– Street surveys• Use convenient place such as mall,

hospital–Mail-out questionnaires• Most dangerous• Feel very strongly about the issue-

>bias– Volunteer call• Selection bias

Page 16: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Non-probability sampling-Convenience sampling• Select a sample through an easy, simple or

inexpensive method• Problem– High risk of creating a bias–May provide misleading information– Can be accepted, but…• Be careful in assessing• And the results they produce

Page 17: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Basic probability sampling

• Simple random sampling– Each sample of the chosen size has the

same probability of being selected

Page 18: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Basic probability sampling

• Systematic sampling– Obtain a lost of an available population,

ordered according to an unrelated factor– Pick a number n as step size– Pick every n-th subject of the list

Page 19: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Stratified random sampling

Page 20: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Cluster random sampling

Page 21: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Multistage sampling

Page 22: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

The National Health and Nutrition Ex-amination Survey (NHANES)

Page 23: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

NHANES Interviews & Examinations

• ㅍ

Page 24: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

NHANES Sample Design

Page 25: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Analyses of NHANES Data

Page 26: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Weighting in NHANES

• ㅍ

Page 27: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

NHANES base probability of selection

• ㅍ

Page 28: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Oversampling

Page 29: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Sample Weights

Page 30: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Why weight?

Page 31: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Probability weight – simple example

Page 32: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

• Imagine 100 male & 100 female in sample

• But only 80 males & 75 females respond

• Male respondent will get weight of – 100/80->1/(80/100)=1.25

• Female respondent will get weight of– 100/75->1/(75/100)=1.33

Example of weighting

Page 33: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

국민건강영양조사의 표본추출방법 예

Page 34: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

다단계 표본추출

• 단순무작위 표본추출의 실제적 어려움을 해결하기 위해 고안된 방법–전국 규모의 여론조사에 이용– “series” of simple random samples in

stages

• 국민건강영양조사

국가

시도

시군구

읍면동

random sampling

random sampling

random sampling

Page 35: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

유병률 산출 : 가중치 적용

• 목적 : 국민건강영양조사의 표본이 우리나라 국민을 대표하도록 가중치를 사용

Page 36: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Direct age adjustment-before

A B

Age group populationNo. of death

Death rates per 100,000

population No. of deathDeath rates per 100,000

All ages 900,000 862 96 900,000 1,130 126

30-49 500,000 60 12 300,000 30 10

50-69 300,000 396 132 400,000 400 100

70+ 100,000 406 406 200,000 700 350

A B

population No. of deathDeath rates per 100,000

population No. of deathDeath rates per 100,000

900,000 862 96 900,000 1,130 126

Page 37: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Direct age adjustment-after

Age groupStandard population

“A" age-specific mortality rates

per 100,000

Expected No. of deaths using

“A" rates

“B" age-specific mortality rates per

100,000

Expected No. of deaths using

“B" rates

All ages 1,800,00030-49 800,000 12 96 10 8050-69 700,000 132 924 100 70070+ 300,000 406 1,218 350 1,050Total 2,238 1,830

Age-adjusted rates 124.3 101.7

Age-adjusted rates: 2238/1800000=124.3 1830/1800000=101.7

A B

population No. of deathDeath rates per 100,000

population No. of deathDeath rates per 100,000

900,000 862 96 900,000 1,130 126

Page 38: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Indirect age adjustment (Standardized Mortality Ratio) • When – number of deaths for each age-specific strata

are not available– Study mortality in an occupational exposure

population

• DefinedObserved number of deaths per year

Expected number of deaths per year

• SMR of 100 • Observed number of deaths is the same as expected

number of deaths

SMR= X100

Page 39: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Sampling, Inference, and generaliza-tion

Page 40: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Sampling, Inference, and generaliza-tion

Page 41: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Sampling, Inference, and generaliza-tion

If you tell the truth you don't have to remember anything. by Mark Twain 1894

Page 42: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Why do we measure disease preva-lence?

Page 43: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Measuring burden: prevalence

Page 44: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Prevalence

Page 45: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Measuring burden: prevalence

Page 46: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Person-time at risk: exposed and un-exposed

Page 47: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Censored individuals

Page 48: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Censoring

Page 49: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Measuring of prevalence

Page 50: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Point and period prevalence: example

Page 51: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Point prevalence at several time points

Page 52: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Period prevalence

Page 53: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Lifetime prevalence

Life time prevalence 4/5

Page 54: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Prevalence of diabetes

Page 55: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Utility of prevalence

Page 56: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Sloppy use of risk

Page 57: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Sloppy use of rate

Page 58: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Classic example of rate that is not a rate

Page 59: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Case fatality(rate?)

Page 60: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Proportional mortality (rate?)

Page 61: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Total deaths united states 2004

Page 62: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Deaths , U.S. 2004 ages 20-24 Years

Page 63: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

What ‘s a possible inferential problem with proportional mortality?

Page 64: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Measuring risk: cumulative incidence

Page 65: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Measuring risk: cumulative incidence

Page 66: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Cumulative incidence is a proportion

Page 67: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Calculating the cumulative incidence

Page 68: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Odds

Page 69: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Odds

Page 70: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Odds

Page 71: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Odds

Page 72: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Odds and probabilities

• The higher the incidence, the higher the discrepancy.

Page 73: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Prevalence, Incidence, disease dura-tion

Page 74: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Disease prevalence depends on

Page 75: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Incidence rates can be calculated for each transition in health status

Page 76: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Incidence rates can be calculated for each transition in health status

Page 77: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Relationship among prevalence, inci-dence rate, disease duration at steady state

Page 78: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Relationship among prevalence, inci-dence rate, disease duration at steady state

Page 79: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Relationship among prevalence, inci-dence rate, disease duration at steady state

Page 80: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Mean duration of disease

Page 81: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Relationship among prevalence, inci-dence rate, disease duration at steady state

Page 82: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Relationship among prevalence, inci-dence rate, disease duration at steady state

Page 83: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Relationship among prevalence, inci-dence rate, disease duration at steady state

Page 84: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

What does steady state mean in the context of estimating P from I and D?

Page 85: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Example varying prevalence, incidence rates and duration of disease

Page 86: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Cross-sectional Bias

• Incidence-Prevalence bias– Type of selection bias– If exposed cases have different duration that no-exposed

prevalent cases, prevalence ratio will be biased– E.g., cases with severe emphysema more likely to

smoke, have higher fatality than cases with less severe emphysema, so the prevalence of emphysema in smok-ers will be underestimated compare to incidence

– Solution-use incident cases – Duration ratio bias– Point prevalence complement ratio bias

• Temporal bias– Information bias

Page 87: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Incidence-Prevalence bias

• PR 과 IRR 의 관계– Prev= incidence X duration X (1-prev)

* Duration ratio bias * Point prevalence complement ratio bias

PR

Page 88: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Duration ratio bias

• Type of selection bias• 드문 질환에서 이환기간이 노출여부와 상관없이

동일하다면 비뚤림 발생하지 않음• 노출여부에 따라 질병 이환기간이 다를 때 발생• 만성질환의 경우 질병의 duration 이

생존기간과 관련이 있기 때문에 이런 경우 생기는 bias 가 survival bias

Page 89: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Point prevalence complement ratio bias

• 이환기간이 동일하다면 , PR 이 IRR 을 과소측정하는 경향이 발생

• 노출그룹의 유병률 : 0.04, 비노출그룹 유병률 : 0.01 PR : 4 Point prevalence complement

ratio=0.96/0.99=0.97• 노출그룹의 유병률 : 0.4, 비노출그룹 유병률 : 0.1 PR : 4 Point prevalence complement

ratio=0.6/0.9=0.67• PR, 유병률 크면 → bias 크기 커짐

Page 90: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Selection bias -- Berkson’s bias

• Admission-rate bias • Cases and/or controls selected from hospitals• Result from differential rates of hospital admission for cases

and controls• If hospital based cases and controls have different expo-

sures that population based, OR will be biased.• E.g., If hospital controls are less likely to have exposures, OR

will be over-estimated. • E.g., Case control for pancreatic cancer and coffee drinking:

Controls were selected from GI patients. However, GI pa-tients are less likely to drink coffee that population. OR was artificially increased.

• Solution: use population based control, or controls with dis-ease not related to the exposure

Page 91: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Temporal bias• 시간적 선후관계가 모호– 질병의 위험요인 검정 측면에서의 결정적 단점– 예 : 영양결핍과 우울증 연구– 시간적 경과에 따른 변동이 없는 노출요인의

경우에는 이러한 제한점에 구애 받지 않음 – 유전적 요인

• 시간적 선후관계가 뒤집어져 있는 연구는 비추– 예 : 가설 ) 식이요인이 초경나이에 미치는 영향 대상 ) 중년여성을 대상으로 초경나이와 최근

의 식이습관 조사

• 전체 유병환자 중 Incident cases 만 포함하여 분석함으로 단점을 최소화 또 다른 bias ?

• Historical information 으로 단점 최소화

Page 92: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

screening is most likely to pick up less aggres-sive cancers, because they have a longer inter-val of being visible on scans while remaining asymptomatic

Page 93: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

you find out something earlier but don’t actu-ally change the outcome, and therefore the apparent survival after diagnosis is longer without better survival

Page 94: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Simpson’s paradox

aggregated

disaggregated

Page 95: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Simpson’s paradox

• Aggregated and disaggregated data tell two different sto-ries

        치료 종류 환자 수 성 공 실 패 성공률 (%)

합계 (n=700)

개복술 350      273      77          78

경피술 350       289    61           83

돌의 크기 < 2cm (n=357)

개복술 87        81      6           93

경피술 270     234    36           87

돌의 크기 ≥ 2cm (n=343)

개복술 263       192     71           73

경피술 80        55      25           69

Page 96: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

단면조사연구 정리

특정 시점 또는 짧은 기간 동안 표본 추출조사 – “스냅 사진”

장점 편리하고 비용 효과적 여러 노출과 질병 연구 가능 가설 생성 가능 일반적 인구집단을 대표

단점 시간적 선후관계 모호 생존자만 연구 , 비뚤림 가능 짧은 이환 기간의 질환은 과소측정

Page 97: Cross Sectional Studies Son  Hee Jung 2013/03/25

Any question?

If you tell the truth you don't have to remember any-thing. by Mark Twain 1894