If I understand correctly, retrospective cohort study collect data by recall, just as case-controlled study. Both of them suffer from recall bias. What is the pros of retrospective cohort study over case-controlled study?
Check this paper
Song, J. W., & Chung, K. C. (2010). Observational studies: cohort and case-control studies. Plastic and reconstructive surgery, 126(6), 2234–2242. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181f44abc
In short, retrospective cohort studies allow researchers to examine the risk associated with the exposures and express them as relative risk (RR), while case-control studies only allow researchers to express the association between exposures and outcomes using odds ratio (OR). Unlike RR, OR cannot be interpreted directly and thus yield lower quality to explain causations underlying the observed effects. I agree with Babak Saravi for the rest of the explanations.
Only advantage is the scope for analysis in terms of time frame . So analysis can be done like a cohort study.
Though all measurement errors inherent to case control design are possible in retrospective cohort studies, the comparison can be more meaningful than a typical case control analysis because the exposed and non-exposed are in identical time of occurrence.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Publication