Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Oct;50(5):1432-51.
doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12279. Epub 2015 Jan 19.

Control Outcomes and Exposures for Improving Internal Validity of Nonrandomized Studies

Stacie B Dusetzina  1   2   3   4 , M Alan Brookhart  4   5 , Matthew L Maciejewski  6   7
Affiliations

Control Outcomes and Exposures for Improving Internal Validity of Nonrandomized Studies

Stacie B Dusetzina et al. Health Serv Res. 2015 Oct.

Abstract

Objective: Control outcomes and exposures can improve internal validity of nonrandomized studies by assessing residual bias in effect estimates. Control outcomes are those expected to have no treatment effect or the opposite effect of the primary outcome. Control exposures are treatments expected to have no effect on the primary outcome. We review examples of control outcomes and exposures from prior studies and provide recommendations for conducting and reporting these analyses.

Data sources and study design: Review in Google Scholar and Medline of research studies employing control outcomes or exposures. We abstracted publication year, control outcome, control exposure, primary outcome, primary exposure, control outcome/exposure effect, proposed source of bias, and causal criteria.

Principal findings: There is inconsistent terminology for these concepts, making study identification challenging. Six of 11 studies found null associations between treatments and negative control outcomes/exposures, providing greater confidence that the primary study findings were not biased. Five studies found unexpected associations, suggesting bias in the primary association.

Conclusions: The rigor of nonrandomized studies can be improved with inclusion of control outcomes and exposures for bias detection. Given ongoing concern about clinical and policy inferences from nonrandomized studies, we recommend adoption of these measurement tools.

Keywords: Control outcomes; control exposures; falsification tests; nonequivalent exposures; nonequivalent outcomes.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Aronow HD, Topol EJ, Roe MT, Houghtaling PL, Wolski KE, Lincoff AM, Harrington RA, Califf RM, Ohman EM, Kleiman NS, Keltai M, Wilcox RG, Vahanian A, Armstrong PW. Lauer MS. Effect of Lipid-Lowering Therapy on Early Mortality after Acute Coronary Syndromes: An Observational Study. Lancet. 2001;357(9262):1063–8. - PubMed
    1. Basker E. Job Creation or Destruction? Labor Market Effects of Wal-Mart Expansion. Review of Economics and Statistics. 2005;87(1):174–83.
    1. Benson K. Hartz AJ. A Comparison of Observational Studies and Randomized, Controlled Trials. New England Journal of Medicine. 2000;342(25):1878–86. - PubMed
    1. Berger ML, Dreyer N, Anderson F, Towse A, Sedrakyan A. Normand SL. Prospective Observational Studies to Assess Comparative Effectiveness: The ISPOR Good Research Practices Task Force Report. Value Health. 2012;15(2):217–30. - PubMed
    1. Berger ML, Martin BC, Husereau D, Worley K, Allen JD, Yang W, Quon NC, Mullins CD, Kahler KH. Crown W. A Questionnaire to Assess the Relevance and Credibility of Observational Studies to Inform Health Care Decision Making: An ISPOR-AMCP-NPC Good Practice Task Force Report. Value Health. 2014;17(2):143–56. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources