Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (57)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by KLEINBAUM, D. G.
Right arrow Articles by KUPPER, L. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by KLEINBAUM, D. G.
Right arrow Articles by KUPPER, L. L.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

American Journal of Epidemiology Vol. 113, No. 4: 452-463
Copyright © 1981 by The Johns Hopkins University School of Hygiene and Public Health

other

SELECTION BIAS IN EPIDEMIOLOGIC STUDIES1,2

DAVID G. KLEINBAUM, HAL MORGENSTERN and LAWRENCE L. KUPPER

Reprint requests to Dr. Kleinbaum, Department of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27514

Kleinbaum, D. G. (Dept. of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, U. of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27514), H. Morgenstern and L. L. Kupper. Selection bias in epidemiologic studies. Am J Epidemiol 1981; 113: 452–63.

Consideration of factors involved in the selection of subjects is essential for evaluating the validity of a putative etiologic association. The purpose of this paper is to provide a quantitative conceptual framework for understanding selection bias; this framework integrates both epidemiologic and statistical considerations. Emphasis is given to specifying the conditions under which such bias is likely to occur, Identifying the direction and magnitude of the bias, and Illustrating how these features differ by type of study design.

biostatistics; cross-sectional studies; epidemiologic methods; follow-up studies

1From the University of North Carolina, School of Public Health, Department of Biostatistics, Chapel Hill, NC (Kleinbaum and Kupper).

2 From Yale University, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, School of Medicine, and Institution for Social and Policy Studies, New Haven, CT (Morgenstern).


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Am J EpidemiolHome page
L. Tooth, R. Ware, C. Bain, D. M. Purdie, and A. Dobson
Quality of Reporting of Observational Longitudinal Research
Am. J. Epidemiol., February 1, 2005; 161(3): 280 - 288.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Epidemiol. Community HealthHome page
M Delgado-Rodriguez and J Llorca
Bias
J Epidemiol Community Health, August 1, 2004; 58(8): 635 - 641.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JAMAHome page
S. R. Daniels, R. S. Greenberg, and M. A. Ibrahim
Scientific Uncertainties in the Studies of Salicylate Use and Reye's Syndrome
JAMA, March 11, 1983; 249(10): 1311 - 1316.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 JAMAHome page
W. E. Scheckler
The Cost of Prevention: Common Sense and Decision Trees
JAMA, March 11, 1983; 249(10): 1328 - 1328.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.