Salīdzināt metodes
Apskatiet izvēlētās metodes blakus; rindas, kas atšķiras, ir izceltas.
| Novērtēšana ar atbilstošu skrīninga testu× | Saskaņots gadījuma kontroles pētījums× | |
|---|---|---|
| Nozare | Epidemioloģija | Epidemioloģija |
| Saime | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Izcelsmes gads≠ | 1980s–2000s (formalized alongside diagnostic accuracy methodology) | 1950s–1970s |
| Autors≠ | Methodological synthesis from matched case-control and diagnostic accuracy traditions (Pepe, Zhou, and others) | Brian MacMahon and others; systematised by Schlesselman (1982) |
| Tips≠ | Observational diagnostic study with matched design | Observational analytic design |
| Pirmavots≠ | Pepe, M. S. (2003). The Statistical Evaluation of Medical Tests for Classification and Prediction. Oxford University Press. ISBN: 978-0198509844 | Rothman, K. J., Greenland, S., & Lash, T. L. (2008). Modern Epidemiology (3rd ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. ISBN: 978-0781755474 |
| Citi nosaukumi | matched diagnostic accuracy study, paired screening evaluation, matched-pair test performance study, matched screening assessment | matched case-referent study, individually matched case-control, pair-matched case-control, matched case-control design |
| Saistītās≠ | 6 | 5 |
| Kopsavilkums≠ | Matched screening test evaluation assesses the sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of a screening or diagnostic test using a matched design, in which disease-positive cases are paired with one or more disease-free controls selected to share key characteristics such as age, sex, or clinical setting. Matching controls for confounders before measuring test performance produces more precise and less biased estimates of diagnostic accuracy, and enables direct paired comparisons of competing tests within the same subjects. | A matched case-control study is an observational epidemiological design in which each case (a person with the disease or outcome of interest) is paired with one or more controls (persons without the outcome) who share one or more characteristics — such as age, sex, or clinical setting — to control confounding. Exposure history is then compared between cases and their matched controls to estimate the odds ratio of the exposure-disease association. |
| ScholarGateDatu kopa ↗ |
|
|