Impact of random and systematic recall errors and selection bias in case--control studies on mobile phone use and brain tumors in adolescents (CEFALO study)

Whether the use of mobile phones is a risk factor for brain tumors in adolescents is currently being studied. Case--control studies investigating this possible relationship are prone to recall error and selection bias. We assessed the potential impact of random and systematic recall error and selection bias on odds ratios (ORs) by performing simulations based on real data from an ongoing case--control study of mobile phones and brain tumor risk in children and adolescents (CEFALO study). Simulations were conducted for two mobile phone exposure categories: regular and heavy use. Our choice of levels of recall error was guided by a validation study that compared objective network operator data with the self-reported amount of mobile phone use in CEFALO. In our validation study, cases overestimated their number of calls by 9% on average and controls by 34%. Cases also overestimated their duration of calls by 52% on average and controls by 163%. The participation rates in CEFALO were 83% for cases and 71% for controls. In a variety of scenarios, the combined impact of recall error and selection bias on the estimated ORs was complex. These simulations are useful for the interpretation of previous case-control studies on brain tumor and mobile phone use in adults as well as for the interpretation of future studies on adolescents.

The GABRIEL Advanced Surveys: study design, participation and evaluation of bias

Exposure to farming environments has been shown to protect substantially against asthma and atopic disease across Europe and in other parts of the world. The GABRIEL Advanced Surveys (GABRIELA) were conducted to determine factors in farming environments which are fundamental to protecting against asthma and atopic disease. The GABRIEL Advanced Surveys have a multi-phase stratified design. In a first-screening phase, a comprehensive population-based survey was conducted to assess the prevalence of exposure to farming environments and of asthma and atopic diseases (n = 103,219). The second phase was designed to ascertain detailed exposure to farming environments and to collect biomaterial and environmental samples in a stratified random sample of phase 1 participants (n = 15,255). A third phase was carried out in a further stratified sample only in Bavaria, southern Germany, aiming at in-depth respiratory disease and exposure assessment including extensive environmental sampling (n = 895). Participation rates in phase 1 were around 60% but only about half of the participating study population consented to further study modules in phase 2. We found that consenting behaviour was related to familial allergies, high parental education, wheeze, doctor diagnosed asthma and rhinoconjunctivitis, and to a lesser extent to exposure to farming environments. The association of exposure to farm environments with asthma or rhinoconjunctivitis was not biased by participation or consenting behaviour. The GABRIEL Advanced Surveys are one of the largest studies to shed light on the protective 'farm effect' on asthma and atopic disease. Bias with regard to the main study question was able to be ruled out by representativeness and high participation rates in phases 2 and 3. The GABRIEL Advanced Surveys have created extensive collections of questionnaire data, biomaterial and environmental samples promising new insights into this area of research.

Tumor architecture exerts no bias on nuclear grading in breast cancer diagnosis

We recently reported that nuclear grading in prostate cancer is subject to a strong confirmation bias induced by the tumor architecture. We now wondered whether a similar bias governs nuclear grading in breast carcinoma. An unannounced test was performed at a pathology conference. Pathologists were asked to grade nuclei in a PowerPoint presentation. Circular high power fields of 27 invasive ductal carcinomas were shown, superimposed over low power background images of either tubule-rich or tubule-poor carcinomas. We found (a) that diagnostic reproducibility of nuclear grades was poor to moderate (weighed kappa values between 0.07 and 0.54, 27 cases, 44 graders), but (b) that nuclear grades were not affected by the tumor architecture. We speculate that the categorized grading in breast cancer, separating tubule formation, nuclear pleomorphism, and mitotic figure counts in a combined three tier score, prevents the bias that architecture exerts on nuclear grades in less well-controlled situations.