Within-person vs. traditional study designs: How to evaluate study designs?

被引：2

作者：

Chen, Henian ^{[1
]}

Nembhard, Wendy N. ^{[1
]}

Stockwell, Heather G. ^{[1
]}

机构：

[1] Univ S Florida, Dept Epidemiol & Biostat, Tampa, FL 33612 USA

来源：

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY | 2013年 / 66卷 / 03期

关键词：

EXPOSURE;

D O I：

10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.04.018

中图分类号：

R19 [保健组织与事业（卫生事业管理）];

学科分类号：

摘要：

引用

收藏

页码：350 / 351

页数：2

相关论文

共 3 条

[1] Semiparametric analysis of case series data
Farrington, C. P.
Whitaker, H. J.
[J]. JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL STATISTICAL SOCIETY SERIES C-APPLIED STATISTICS, 2006, 55 : 553 - 580
[2] Within-person study designs had lower precision and greater susceptibility to bias because of trends in exposure than cohort and nested case-control designs
Nicholas, Jennifer M.
Grieve, Andrew P.
Gulliford, Martin C.
[J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2012, 65 (04) : 384 - 393
[3] Within-subject exposure dependency in case-crossover studies
Vines, SK
Farrington, CP
[J]. STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2001, 20 (20) : 3039 - 3049