These are primarily used to determine prevalence.
Prevalence equals the number of cases in a population at a given point in time.
All the measurements on each person are made at one point in time. Prevalence is vitally important to the clinician because it influences considerably the likelihood of any particular diagnosis and the predictive value of any investigation. For example, knowing that ascending cholangitis in children is very rare enables the clinician to look for other causes of abdominal pain in this patient population.
Cross-sectional studies are also used to infer causation.
At one point in time, the subjects are assessed to determine whether they were exposed to the relevant agent and whether they have the outcome of interest. Some of the subjects will not have been exposed nor have the outcome of interest. This clearly distinguishes this type of study from the other observational studies (cohort and case-controlled) where reference to either exposure and/or outcome is made.
The advantage of such studies is that subjects are neither deliberately exposed, treated, or not treated and hence there are seldom ethical difficulties. Only one group is used, data are collected only once, and multiple outcomes can be studied; thus this type of study is relatively inexpensive.
Cross-sectional studies: key points
- Cross-sectional studies are the best way to determine prevalence.
- They are relatively quick.
- The can study multiple outcomes.
- Do not themselves differentiate between cause and effect or the sequence of events.
See reference for details.
Observational research methods. Research design II: cohort, cross sectional, and case-control studies. CJ Mann. Emerg Med J 2003;20:54–60. Accessed on October 6, 2012.