Bias in occupational epidemiology studies

被引:257
作者
Pearce, Neil
Checkoway, Harvey
Kriebel, David
机构
[1] Massey Univ, Ctr Publ Hlth Res, Wellington, New Zealand
[2] Univ Washington, Dept Environm & Occupat Hlth Sci, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
[3] Int Agcy Res Canc, Lyon, France
[4] Univ Massachusetts, Dept Work Environm, Lowell, MA USA
关键词
D O I
10.1136/oem.2006.026690
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
The design of occupational epidemiology studies should incorporate strategies to minimise systematic error (selection bias, information bias and confounding). Selection bias can be minimised by obtaining a high response rate (in case-control studies we would also require that the controls be selected from the population generating the cases). Information should be collected in a standardised manner to help ensure that misclassification will be non-differential. In this situation, if it is independent of other errors, exposure and disease misclassification, if independent, will tend to produce false negative findings and will thus be of greatest concern in studies which have not found an important effect of exposure. Thus, in general, it is important to ensure that information bias is non-differential and, within this constraint, to keep it as small as possible. The potential for confounding by unmeasured risk factors is of concern in any epidemiological study. The task is therefore to minimise confounding in the study design, and to control for it in the analysis. Strong associations between workplace conditions and health outcomes are seldom attributable solely to uncontrolled confounding. However, confounding can be an important bias in studies where occupational risk factors have relatively modest or weak effects.50 For each of these types of bias, the goal should be to avoid the bias by appropriate study design and/or appropriate control in the analysis. However, reducing one type of bias may increase another type. For example, the use of an expensive biomarker involving a blood test may reduce misclassification of exposure but may increase random error by reducing study size (because of the cost of the biomarker), and may also increase selection bias (if non-response is greater because of the need for a blood test). Thus, study design always involves a compromise between these competing goals, and there is always the need to assess the likely direction and strength of biases that cannot be avoided or controlled.
引用
收藏
页码:562 / 568
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
[1]   ASPECTS OF MISCLASSIFICATION OF CONFOUNDING FACTORS [J].
AHLBOM, A ;
STEINECK, G .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL MEDICINE, 1992, 21 (01) :107-112
[2]  
[Anonymous], HDB EPIDEMIOLOGY
[3]  
[Anonymous], SCAND J WORK ENV HLT
[4]   Effect of measurement error on epidemiological studies of environmental and occupational exposures [J].
Armstrong, BG .
OCCUPATIONAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL MEDICINE, 1998, 55 (10) :651-656
[5]  
Armstrong BK, 1992, Principles of exposure measurement in epidemiology
[6]   INDIRECT METHODS OF ASSESSING THE EFFECTS OF TOBACCO USE IN OCCUPATIONAL STUDIES [J].
AXELSON, O ;
STEENLAND, K .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL MEDICINE, 1988, 13 (01) :105-118
[7]  
AXELSON O, 1989, BRIT J IND MED, V46, P505
[8]   Relation of occupational exposure to respiratory symptoms and asthma in a general population sample: Self-reported versus interview-based exposure data [J].
Bakke, PS ;
Hanoa, R ;
Gulsvik, A .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2001, 154 (05) :477-483
[9]  
BRENNER H, 1994, EPIDEMIOLOGY, V5, P510
[10]   PERTINENCY OF AN EXTRANEOUS VARIABLE [J].
BROSS, IDJ .
JOURNAL OF CHRONIC DISEASES, 1967, 20 (07) :487-&