Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

2 results

  • KAMEDO Report No. 86: Explosion in the Artificial-Fertilizer Factory in France, 2001

  • Louis Riddez, Siegfried Joussineau, Eva Magnusson
  • Journal:
    Prehospital and Disaster Medicine / Volume 22 / Issue 1 / February 2007
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    28 June 2012, pp. 84-85
    Print publication:
    February 2007

  • On 21 September 2001, an earthquake triggered an explosion at an artificial fertilizer factory in Toulouse, France. As a result, 30 people were killed and 3,500 people were injured. Extensive damage hindered rescue services in their efforts to reach the factory; however, within several hours an assembly point with 60 doctors was established several kilometers from the explosion site. One hospital close to the scene needed to be temporarily evacuated.The disaster challenged rescue teams on many levels; for example, there was a question of toxicity, as well as communication difficulties due to the damaged telephone lines and clogged mobile networks.

  • 11 - Case–Control Studies in Injury Research

  • Edited by Frederick P. Rivara, Harborview Injury Prevention and Research Center, Seattle, Peter Cummings, Harborview Injury Prevention and Research Center, Seattle, Thomas D. Koepsell, Harborview Injury Prevention and Research Center, Seattle, David C. Grossman, Harborview Injury Prevention and Research Center, Seattle, Ronald V. Maier, Harborview Injury Prevention and Research Center, Seattle
  • Book:
    Injury Control
    Published online:
    16 October 2009
    Print publication:
    27 November 2000, pp 139-156

  • Summary

    To study exposures which cannot be randomly assigned, we usually turn to comparative observational study designs: either cohort or case-control studies. The chapter describes the design and analysis of case-control studies. In planning a case-control study, it is helpful to think of the study as being set in a specific population or cohort, even though most members of that population will not participate in the study. In selecting cases, we should consider the step in the causal chain that we wish to study. In principle, controls should be a sample of persons from the same population from which the cases were derived. The chapter also discusses two special case-control designs, proportional mortality studies and case-crossover studies. Matching controls to cases may be justified if it promises to enhance study efficiency or to control for factors that cannot otherwise be measured.