Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Clinical Genetic Research 1: Bias

  • Protocol
  • First Online:
Book cover Clinical Epidemiology

Part of the book series: Methods in Molecular Biology ((MIMB,volume 1281))

  • 4418 Accesses

Abstract

Clinical epidemiological research in genetic diseases entails assessment of phenotypes, the burden and etiology of disease, and the efficacy of preventive measures or treatments in populations. In all areas, the main focus is to describe the relationship between exposure and outcome and to determine one of the following: prevalence, incidence, cause, prognosis, or effect of treatment. The accuracy of these conclusions is determined by the validity of the study. Validity is determined by addressing potential biases and possible confounders that may be responsible for the observed association. Therefore, it is important to understand the types of bias that exist and also to be able to assess their impact on the magnitude and direction of the observed effect. The following chapter reviews the epidemiological concepts of selection bias, information bias, and confounding and discusses ways in which these sources of bias can be minimized.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Protocol
USD 49.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Young JM, Solomon MJ (2003) Improving the evidence base in surgery: sources of bias in surgical studies. ANZ J Surg 73:504–506

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Jepsen P, Johnsen SP, Gillman MW, Sorensen HT (2004) Interpretation of observational studies. Heart 90:956–960

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Blackmore CC, Cummings P (2004) Observational studies in radiology. AJR 183:1203–1208

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Barnett ML, Hyman JJ (2006) Challenges in interpreting study results: the conflict between appearance and reality. JADA 137:32S–36S

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Stuckless S, Parfrey PS, Woods MO, Cox J, Fitzgerald GW, Green JS, Green RC (2007) The phenotypic expression of three MSH2 mutations in large Newfoundland families with Lynch Syndrome. Fam Cancer 6:1–12

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Dicks E, Ravani P, Langman D, Davidson WS, Pei Y, Parfrey PS (2006) Incident renal events and risk factors in autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease: a population and family based cohort followed for 22 years. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 1:710–717

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Moore SJ, Green JS, Fan Y, Bhogal AK, Dicks E, Fernandez BF, Stefanelli M, Murphy C, Cramer BC, Dean JCS, Beales PL, Katsanis N, Bassett A, Davidson WS, Parfrey PS (2005) Clinical and genetic epidemiology of Bardet-Biedl syndrome in Newfoundland: a 22-year prospective, population-based cohort study. Am J Med Genet 132A:352–360

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hodgkinson KA, Parfrey PS, Bassett AS, Kupprion C, Drenckhahn J, Norman MW, Thierfelder L, Stuckless SN, Dicks EL, McKenna WJ, Connors SP (2005) The impact of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy on survival in autosomal-dominant arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVD5). J Am Coll Cardiol 45:400–408

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Sica GT (2006) Bias in research studies. Radiology 238:780–789

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Zaccai JH (2004) How to assess epidemiological studies. Postgrad Med J 80:140–147

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Moles DR, dos Santos Silva I (2000) Causes, associations and evaluating evidence; can we trust what we read? Evid Base Dent 2:75–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Dore DD, Larrat EP, Vogenberg FR (2006) Principles of epidemiology for clinical and formulary management professionals. P&T 31:218–226

    Google Scholar 

  13. Hartman JM, Forsen JW, Wallace MS, Neely JG (2002) Tutorials in clinical research: part IV: recognizing and controlling bias. Laryngoscope 112:23–31

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Sitthi-amorn C, Poshyachinda V (1993) Bias. Lancet 342:286–288

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Grimes DA, Schulz KF (2002) Bias and causal associations in observational research. Lancet 359:248–52

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Delgado-Rodríguez M, Llorca J (2004) Bias. J Epidemiol Community Health 58:635–641

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Major types of research study bias. http://www.umdnj.edu/idsweb/shared/biases.htm

  18. Clancy MJ (2002) Overview of research designs. Emerg Med J 19:546–549

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Bayona M, Olsen C (2004) Observational studies and bias in epidemiology. YES—The Young Epidemiology Scholars Program; Copyright 2004. http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/yes/4297_MODULE_19.pdf

  20. World Health Organization (2nd ed.) (2001) Health research methodology: A guide for training in research methods. http://www.wpro.who.int/NR/rdonlyres/F334320C-2B19_4F38-A358-27E84FF3BC0F/0/contents.pdf

  21. Hammal DM, Bell CL (2002) Confounding and bias in epidemiological investigations. Pediatr Hematol Oncol 19:375–381

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Carayol J, Khlat M, Maccario J, Bonaiti-Pellie C (2002) Hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer: current risks of colorectal cancer largely overestimated. J Med Genet 39:335–339

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Satagopan JM, Ben-Porat L, Berwick M, Robson M, Kutler D, Auerbach AD (2004) A note on competing risks in survival data analysis. Br J Cancer 91:1229–1235

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Wang PP, Dicks E, Gong X, Buehler S, Zhao J, Squires J, Younghusband B, McLaughlin JR, Parfrey PS (2009) Validity of random-digit-dialing in recruiting controls in a case—control study. Am J Health Behav 33:513–20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Manolio TA, Bailey-Wilson JE, Collins FS (2006) Genes, environment and the value of prospective cohort studies. Nat Rev Genet 7:812–820

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Sackett DL (1979) Bias in analytic research. J Chron Dis 32:51–63

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Dorak MT (2012) Bias and confounding. http://www.dorak.info/epi/bc.html

  28. EBM Definitions (2014) Clinical epidemiology definitions. http://www.fammed.ouhsc.edu/robhamm/UsersGuide/define.htm

  29. Vineis P, McMichael AJ (1998) Bias and confounding in molecular epidemiological studies: special considerations. Carcinogenesis 19:2063–2067

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Mother and Child Health: Research Methods (2014) Chapter 13: Common pitfalls. http://www.oxfordjournals.org/our_journals/tropej/online/ce_ch13.pdf

  31. Okasha M (2001) Interpreting epidemiological findings. Student BMJ 9:324–325

    Google Scholar 

  32. Ravani P, Parfrey PS, Dicks E, Barrett BJ (2007) Clinical research of kidney diseases II: problems of study design. Nephrol Dial Transpl 22:2785–2794

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Health Science Centre, Memorial University of Newfoundland, Room 4M129, 300 Prince Philip Drive, St. John’s, NL, Canada, A1B 3V6

    Susan Stuckless

  2. Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, NL, Canada

    Susan Stuckless & Patrick S. Parfrey

Authors
  1. Susan Stuckless
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Patrick S. Parfrey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Susan Stuckless .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada

    Patrick S. Parfrey

  2. Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada

    Brendan J. Barrett

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this protocol

Cite this protocol

Stuckless, S., Parfrey, P.S. (2015). Clinical Genetic Research 1: Bias. In: Parfrey, P., Barrett, B. (eds) Clinical Epidemiology. Methods in Molecular Biology, vol 1281. Humana Press, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2428-8_20

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2428-8_20

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Humana Press, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-2427-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-2428-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Protocols

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation