Advantages and disadvantages of cross-sectional studies
Digital Vision./Digital Vision/Getty Images
Cross-sectional studies are surveys that collate and present information on health-related issues such as diseases, risk factors and health care resources and personnel.
A cross-sectional survey may be used to measure the prevalence, burden or cost of a disease or the number of doctors, nurses or hospital beds available in a specific region. Whatever a cross-sectional study is examining, it’s examining it within the context of a predefined population sample and at a particular point in time. Like all research methods, cross-sectional studies have both advantages and disadvantages.
As cross-sectional studies don’t take long to complete, and don’t require any follow-up actions they can be very cost-effective. However, such surveys collect data from a large number of subjects dispersed across a large geographical area. This can make cross-sectional studies costly in comparison to research methods that involve fewer people and locations.
With cross-sectional research, you can collate data on many different variables in just the one study. This enables you to examine whether several variables are associated with one another without having to conduct multiple studies. The downside is you can only make associations between variables; you can’t actually prove that one variable is causing changes in the other variables. This is less of a problem if you have the time and resources to follow up the cross-sectional study with a different type of study, such as a cohort study, that is able to examine more closely the issue of causality amongst the variables.
- With cross-sectional research, you can collate data on many different variables in just the one study.
- This enables you to examine whether several variables are associated with one another without having to conduct multiple studies.
The advantage of cross-sectional surveys focusing on one particular point in time is that they provide you with a snapshot of the situation at a specific moment in time. You can look at several studies conducted on the same subject and in the same location but at different times to compare different snapshots in time. The disadvantage of a study being time bound in this way is that it has difficulty in determining the correct chronological sequence of events. It cannot tell which variable out of several started changing first.
- The advantage of cross-sectional surveys focusing on one particular point in time is that they provide you with a snapshot of the situation at a specific moment in time.
Although the cross-sectional study isn’t based on a hypothesis as such, its findings on potential associations between variables are able to generate hypotheses to base future studies upon. However, a cross-sectional survey in itself has difficulty in disproving rival studies’ hypotheses as it can neither confirm nor disprove the existence of causal relationships between specific variables.
The Disadvantages of Logistic Regression→
Advantages & disadvantages of qualitative & quantitative research methods→
Difference between narrative analysis & ipa→
How to use the likert scale in statistical analysis→
The Advantages of Exploratory Research Design→
Advantages & disadvantages of multi-stage sampling→
- International Agency for Research on Cancer: Cross-Sectional Surveys
- Pan African Thoracic Society: Study Design 2: Cross - Sectional Studies
- CareSearch: Evidence Based Practice: Cross Sectional Studies
- California State University, Long Beach: Ppa 696 Research Methods
- Evidence-Based Dentistry: Study design III: Cross-Sectional Studies
- Emergency Medicine Journal: Observational Research Methods. Research Design II: Cohort, Cross Sectional, and Case-Control Studies
Based in London, Autumn St. John has been writing career- and business-related articles since 2007. Her work has appeared in the "Guardian" and "Changing Careers" magazine. St. John holds a Master of Arts in Russian and East European literature and culture from University College London, as well as a Bachelor of Arts in modern history from the University of Oxford.