Skip to main content
Log in

Migration bias in ecologic studies

  • Published:
European Journal of Epidemiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Differential migration may provoke bias in an epidemiological assessment of the public health risks from exposure to environmental agents, particularly in ecologic studies of health outcomes with a long latency or induction period. The potential impact of migration bias on epidemiological research is complex, and it depends not only on the direction of the factor-related migration, but also on its extent. This study shows that even a small amount of differential migration can bias the assessment of the exposure–outcome relationship. Migration bias may result from a number of circumstances that are related to the way in which ‘populations’ are defined and ascertained. It is important to understand and minimise this type of bias in epidemiological research.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Jones ME, Swerdlow AJ. Bias caused by migration in case-control studies of prenatal risk factors for childhood and adult diseases. Am J Epidemiol 1996; 143: 823–831.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Beaglehole R, Bonita R, Kjellstrom T. Basic epidemiology. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organisation, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Corvalan C, Nurminen M, Pastides H. Linkage methods for environment and health analysis: Technical guidelines. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organisation, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Gordis L. Epidemiology. Philadelphia, USA: W.B. Saunders Company, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  5. National Research Council (NRC). Possible health effects of exposure to residential electric and magnetic fields. NRC, Washington: National Academy Press, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  6. McKenzie DR, Yin Y, Morrell S. Childhood incidence of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia and exposure to broadcast radiation in Sydney-a second look. Aust N Z J Public Health 1998; 22: 360–367.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Dolk H, Shaddick H, Walls P, et al. Cancer incidence near radio and television transmitters in Great Britian. Part I. Sutton Coldfield transmitter. Am J Epidemiol 1997; 145: 1–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Haynes RM. The distribution of domestic radon con-centrations and lung cancer mortality in England and Wales. Radiat Protect Dosim 1988; 25: 93–96.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Vonstille WT, Sacarello HLA. Radon and cancer: Florida study finds no evidence of increased risk. J Environ Health 1990; 53: 25–28.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Cohen B. A test of the linear-no threshold theory of radiation carcinogenesis. Environ Res 1990; 53: 193–200.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ruosteenoja E. Indoor radon and risk of lung cancer: An epidemiological study in Finland. Helsinki, Finland: Finnish Centre for Radiation and Nuclear Safety, Report STUK-A99, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Dockery DW, Pope CA III, Xu X, et al. An association between air pollution and mortality in six U.S. cities. N Engl J Med 1993; 329: 1753–1759.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Moolgavkar SH, Luebeck EG, Hall TA, Anderson EL. Air pollution and daily mortality in Philadelphia. Epidemiol 1995; 6: 476–484.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Ballester F, Corella D, Perez-Hoyos S, Hervas A. Air pollution and mortality in Valencia, Spain: A study using the APHEA methodology. J Epidemiol Comm Health 1996; 50: 527–533.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Armstrong BK. Stratospheric ozone and health. Int J Epidemiol 1994; 23: 873–885.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Langford IH, Bentham G. The potential effects of climate change on winter mortality in England and Wales. Int J Biometeorol 1995; 38: 141–147.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kalkstein LS, Davis R. Weather and human mortality: An evaluation of demographic and interregional responses in the United States. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 1989; 79: 44–64.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Prentice RL, Kakar F, Hursting S, et al. Aspects of the rationale for the women's health trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 1988; 80: 802–814.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Greenland S. Divergent biases in ecologic and individual-level studies. Stat Med 1992; 11: 1209–1223.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Miller AB, Berrino F, Hill M, et al. Diet in the aetiology of cancer: A review. Eur J Cancer 1994; 30: 207–220.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Polissar L. The effect of migration on comparison of disease rates in geographic studies in the United States. Am J Epidemiol 1980; 111: 175–181.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Bell M. Internal migration in Australia 1986–1991: Overview report. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Hocking B, Gordon IR, Grain HL, Hatfield GE. Cancer incidence and mortality and proximity to TV towers. Med J Aust 1996; 165: 601–605.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Morgenstern H. Uses of ecologic analysis in epidemiologic research. Am J Public Health 1982; 72: 1336–1344.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Richardson S, Stucker I, Hemon D. Comparison of relative risks obtained in ecological and individual studies. Int J Epidemiol 1987; 16: 111–120.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Greenland S, Morgenstern H. Ecological bias, confounding, and effect modification. Int J Epidemiol 1989; 18: 269–274.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Copeland KT, Checkoway H, McMichael AJ, et al. Bias due to misclassification in the estimation of relative risk. Am J Epidemiol 1977; 105: 488–495.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Duffy SW, Rohan TE, Day NE. Misclassification in more than one factor in a case control study: A combination of Mantel-Haenszel and maximum likelihood approaches. Stat Med 1989; 8: 1529–1536.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Mertens TE. Estimating the effects of misclassification. Lancet 1993; 342: 418–421.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Cohen BL. Invited commentary: in defence of ecologic studies for testing a linear-no threshold theory. Am J Epidemiol 1994; 139: 765–768.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tong, S. Migration bias in ecologic studies. Eur J Epidemiol 16, 365–369 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007698700119

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007698700119

Navigation