The main weakness of the case control study is that it is very poor at determining cause and effect relationships. This generated a statistical result, showing that wearing a cycle helmet made it 88% less likely that head injury would be suffered in an accident. A case study control was utilized, and the researchers looked at medical records, comparing the number of head injury sufferers wearing helmets against those without. Obviously, the researcher could not use standard experimentation and compare a control group of non-helmet wearers with helmet wearers, to measure the chances of head injury, as this would be unethical. Possibly the most famous case control study using this method was a study into whether bicycle helmets reduce the chance of cyclists receiving bad head injuries in an accident. If the majority of the cases arose in collieries owned by one company, it might indicate that the company's safety equipment and procedures were at fault. For example, a scientist could compare a group of coal miners suffering from lung cancer with those clear of the disease, and try to establish the underlying cause. Statistical analysis allows the researcher to draw a conclusion about whether a certain situation or exposure led to the medical condition. Any trends can then be highlighted and action can be taken. Medical records and interviews are used to try to build up a historical picture of the patient's life, allowing cross-reference between patients and statistical analysis. The case control study uses groups of patients stricken with a disease and compares them with a control group of patients not suffering symptoms. Whilst this method does suffer from some weaknesses, it is relatively easy and delivers results quickly. Longitudinal studies are the preferred method, but are often expensive, time consuming and difficult.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |