Bias in research can distort a study’s findings and lead researchers to report skewed conclusions about the relationship between toxic exposures and health outcomes. Bias comes in many forms, with some common examples including bias in how people are selected into a study, and bias that occurs when an influential variable is not properly accounted for in analyses.
In a major step forward to help address this problem, David Richardson, PhD, professor of environmental and occupational health at UC Irvine Joe C. Wen School of Population & Public Health, served as co-editor for a new book, Bias Assessment in Case–Control and Cohort Studies for Hazard Identification, published with the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC).
In a collaboration with researchers from various countries, disciplines, and institutions, Richardson and fellow co-authors offer the scientific community a comprehensive guide to assessing the impact of various types of biases that may affect epidemiological study results.
Reducing bias in epidemiological studies is crucial because it improves the accuracy of findings and allows researchers to draw valid conclusions about relationships between exposures and disease.”
– David Richardson, PhD
The book is designed to be accessible to epidemiologists and researchers who have little advanced statistical training, as well as statisticians with limited experience in epidemiology, to ensure that a wide range of professionals can effectively apply their methodology. Researchers will find step-by-step guidance on how to implement bias assessments, making it an indispensable resource for those conducting studies in fields such as environmental health, occupational safety, and cancer research. Policymakers can also benefit from its methodologies, ensuring that studies used to inform public health decisions are based on the most accurate and unbiased data possible.
“Reducing bias in epidemiological studies is crucial because it improves the accuracy of findings and allows researchers to draw valid conclusions about relationships between exposures and disease,” said Richardson, who also serves as the associate dean of research at Wen Public Health. “Biases skew results and can lead to incorrect conclusions about the causes of diseases such as cancer. This in turn can misguide public health interventions intended to improve health and reduce disparities in disease.”
With the IARC’s ongoing mission to improve cancer research methodologies, Bias Assessment in Case–Control and Cohort Studies for Hazard Identification is set to make a lasting impact on the global research community by providing the tools necessary to reduce bias and enhance the reliability of epidemiological studies.
“Reducing bias enhances scientific integrity, and hopefully also improves public health strategies to reduce disparities in the occurrence of cancer and other diseases,” added Richardson.
Additional editors include Amy Berrington de Gonzalez from the Institute of Cancer Research and Mary K. Schubauer-Berigan from the International Agency for Research on Cancer.
