PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 8887376

Occupational epidemiologic study design and application.

A Blair·R B Hayes·P A Stewart·S H Zahm
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Occupational epidemiologic investigations have provided, and will continue to provide, important information to understand environmental causes of disease. High-quality investigations designed to test hypotheses have several requirements. They must include valid quantitative assessments of exposure, some information on lifestyle risk factors, and include biologic monitoring and marker components whenever possible. Availability of these data allows a clear evaluation of potential confounders and biases, assessment of interaction among risk factors, and provides the opportunity to identify susceptible subgroups.

Explore related subjects

BiasCase-Control StudiesCohort StudiesEnvironmental MonitoringEpidemiologic MethodsEpidemiological MonitoringHumansLife StyleOccupational DiseasesOccupational MedicineReproducibility of ResultsResearch DesignRisk FactorsJournal ArticleReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

A Blair, R B Hayes, P A Stewart, S H Zahm. Occupational epidemiologic study design and application.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8887376/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2026

Assessment of blinding in pharmacotherapy and noninvasive neuromodulation randomized controlled trials for neuropathic pain in adults.

In randomized controlled trials (RCTs), study participants and research personnel are often blinded to minimize biases related to knowing treatment allocation. To determine if blinding was effective, participants may be asked which treatment they believe they received ("treatment guess"). This descriptive review characterized blinding assessment (BA) reporting in pharmacotherapy and neuromodulation neuropathic pain RCTs. Of 288 papers, 36 (12.5%) reported a BA. One paper reported the results of 2 studies, so in total 37 studies with a BA were assessed. Of these, 19 were crossover, 17 parallel, and 1 partial crossover in design. All 37 studies assessed participant blinding, and 10 also assessed investigator blinding. Approximately 27% included an "unsure" answer option for treatment guess, and 38% asked the reason for the guess. There were no clear patterns in BA reporting across time nor based on treatment type. Seventeen trials provided sufficient data to calculate Bang Blinding Index (BI) to determine blinding success. Participants remained blinded (BI = 0 &#xb1; 0.2) in 10/17 placebo and 10/17 treatment arms, 6 placebo and 5 treatment arms had a BI > 0.2 suggesting possible unblinding, whereas 1 placebo and 2 treatment arms had a BI < -0.2 suggesting misinformed guessing. Overall, we found that BAs are done in a minority of published neuropathic pain trials and with variable methodology. Given the importance of minimizing risk of bias because of treatment unblinding, future studies should consider including BAs, and further consensus building is necessary to determine if and how BAs should be conducted and interpreted in analgesic clinical trials.

Bias↗
PubMed2000

Bias associated with study protocols in epidemiologic studies of disease familial aggregation.

The effect of selection bias has not been well evaluated in epidemiologic studies which focus on familial aggregation. The authors illustrate this type of bias for a reconstructed cohort study. With the reconstructed cohort design, cases and controls are first selected from the population and their relatives form the exposed and unexposed cohorts, respectively. The recurrence risk ratio (RRR) is calculated to assess and measure familial aggregation. The ways of utilizing information from relatives affects the estimate of RRR, and the authors show that a traditional method used in epidemiologic studies can yield a severely biased estimate of the RRR. However, this traditional approach can give approximately unbiased estimates under special conditions. A novel selection approach is proposed which yields an unbiased estimate of RRR. In conclusion, when relatives are identified through cases or controls, they should be included and counted in the study cohorts each time a case or control is selected, even if they or other family members have already been included.

Bias↗