Intended for healthcare professionals

CCBYNC Open access
Research Methods & Reporting

Analysis of matched case-control studies

BMJ 2016; 352 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i969 (Published 25 February 2016) Cite this as: BMJ 2016;352:i969
  1. Neil Pearce, professor1 2
  1. 1Department of Medical Statistics and Centre for Global NCDs, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London WC1E 7HT, UK
  2. 2Centre for Public Health Research, Massey University, Wellington, New Zealand
  1. neil.pearce{at}lshtm.ac.uk
  • Accepted 30 December 2015

There are two common misconceptions about case-control studies: that matching in itself eliminates (controls) confounding by the matching factors, and that if matching has been performed, then a “matched analysis” is required. However, matching in a case-control study does not control for confounding by the matching factors; in fact it can introduce confounding by the matching factors even when it did not exist in the source population. Thus, a matched design may require controlling for the matching factors in the analysis. However, it is not the case that a matched design requires a matched analysis. Provided that there are no problems of sparse data, control for the matching factors can be obtained, with no loss of validity and a possible increase in precision, using a “standard” (unconditional) analysis, and a “matched” (conditional) analysis may not be required or appropriate.

Summary points

  • Matching in a case-control study does not control for confounding by the matching factors

  • A matched design may require controlling for the matching factors in the analysis

  • However, it is not the case that a matched design requires a matched analysis

  • A “standard” (unconditional) analysis may be most valid and appropriate, and a “matched” (conditional) analysis may not be required or appropriate

Matching on factors such as age and sex is commonly used in case-control studies.1 This can be done for convenience (eg, choosing a control admitted to hospital on the same day as the case), to improve study efficiency by improving precision (under certain conditions) when controlling for the matching factors (eg, age, sex) in the analysis, or to enable control in the analysis of unquantifiable factors such as neighbourhood characteristics (eg, by choosing neighbours as controls and then controlling for neighbourhood in the analysis). The increase in efficiency occurs because it ensures similar numbers of cases and controls …

View Full Text