Table 2.
Age distribution of unexposed and exposed subjects (in years) |
||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
N(65, 102) vs. N(70, 102) |
N(60, 102) vs. N(70, 102) |
N(50, 102) vs. N(70, 102) |
||||
d | Unconditional | Conditional | Unconditional | Conditional | Unconditional | Conditional |
Odds ratio associated with a 10-year increase in age = 1 | ||||||
0 | 0.73 | 0.73 | 0.78 | 0.77 | 0.78 | 0.80 |
1 | 0.77 | 0.76 | 0.76 | 0.77 | 0.78 | 0.81 |
2 | 0.73 | 0.72 | 0.76 | 0.75 | 0.78 | 0.81 |
3 | 0.73 | 0.73 | 0.77 | 0.78 | 0.78 | 0.80 |
Odds ratio associated with a 10-year increase in age = 1.5 | ||||||
0 | 0.76 | 0.76 | 0.80 | 0.80 | 0.82 | 0.84 |
1 | 0.75 | 0.74 | 0.81 | 0.82 | 0.79 | 0.83 |
2 | 0.80 | 0.80 | 0.81 | 0.80 | 0.81 | 0.83 |
3 | 0.78 | 0.78 | 0.82 | 0.82 | 0.81 | 0.84 |
Odds ratio associated with a 10-year increase in age = 2 | ||||||
0 | 0.80 | 0.79 | 0.80 | 0.80 | 0.76 | 0.78 |
1 | 0.79 | 0.79 | 0.83 | 0.82 | 0.81 | 0.83 |
2 | 0.79 | 0.79 | 0.82 | 0.80 | 0.78 | 0.82 |
3 | 0.78 | 0.77 | 0.80 | 0.80 | 0.75 | 0.76 |
Odds ratio associated with a 10-year increase in age = 3 | ||||||
0 | 0.76 | 0.76 | 0.83 | 0.83 | 0.77 | 0.80 |
1 | 0.80 | 0.80 | 0.85 | 0.85 | 0.76 | 0.78 |
2 | 0.79 | 0.78 | 0.82 | 0.82 | 0.75 | 0.79 |
3 | 0.81 | 0.78 | 0.85 | 0.83 | 0.71 | 0.74 |
Cases and controls were matched by age ± d. The odds ratio associated with the exposure was 1.5 under the alternative hypothesis, H0: βe ≠ 0. Numbers of matching sets were 400, 500, and 900 in the three scenarios of age distributions. Power simulation results that gave a difference between models 5% or greater were highlighted in bold.