A case-control study is conducted to evaluate the association between the consumption of a widely used artificial sweetener and the incidence of transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder. The investigators enroll patients with newly diagnosed bladder cancer and age-matched controls without bladder cancer. An initial crude data analysis reveals an odds ratio (OR) of ( CI: , ) for bladder cancer among artificial sweetener users compared to non-users.
During the study's review phase, an epidemiologist points out that cigarette smoking is a significant risk factor for bladder cancer and is also strongly associated with higher artificial sweetener consumption in this population. To address this, the investigators perform a stratified analysis based on the participants' smoking history. The results are presented below:
| Stratum | Odds Ratio (OR) | Confidence Interval | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Current or former smokers | |||
| Never-smokers |
Based on these findings, which of the following statements is most accurate?
- ACigarette smoking acts as an effect modifier, and the investigators should report the stratified odds ratios separately to highlight the differing risks.
- Cigarette smoking acts as a confounding variable, and the investigators should report an adjusted odds ratio to account for this factor.Cevap
- CThe crude findings are inherently flawed because a case-control design was chosen instead of a retrospective cohort study, which is required to assess past exposures.
- DThe differing odds ratios indicate that the prevalence of smoking in the study population has altered the positive predictive value of artificial sweetener use.
- EThe significant drop in the odds ratio after stratification indicates a systematic data collection error, requiring a root cause analysis to identify the responsible researcher.