Commentary on “Bias in observational studies”

  • Manning Feinleib
Conference paper


This is actually the third conference on the topic of weak associations or, as we may now be calling them, small effects. E. Wynder organised one almost fifteen years ago and a second some ten years ago. The topic I had to discuss ten years ago had almost the same title as today’s talk, “Biases and Weak Associations”. So I went back to my previous publication and saw that I could say just about the same things now. But I will give that as a reference (Feinleib 1987; Wynder et al. 1982; Sackett 1979) and go on to some other points at the present time.


Instrumental Variable Weak Association Nutritional Disorder Relevant Exposure Specific Cancer Site 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Feinleib M (1987) Biases and weak associations. Prey Med 16: 150–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wynder EL, Schlesselman J, Wald N, Lilienfeld A, Stolley P, Higgins ITT, Radford E (1982) Conference report: Weak associations in epidemiology and their interpretation. Prey Med 11: 464–476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sackett DL (1979) Bias in analytic research. J Chron Dis 32: 51–68PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Manning Feinleib
    • 1
  1. 1.USA

Personalised recommendations