The UK Biobank and selection bias

The Lancet

Volumn 380, Issue 9837, 2012, Pages 110-

  Swanson, James M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DATA BASE; EPIDEMIOLOGY; LETTER; POPULATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; UNITED KINGDOM; CHRONIC DISEASE; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE FACILITY; HUMAN; MALE; NOTE; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PUBLIC HEALTH; TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCH;

BIOLOGICAL SPECIMEN BANKS; CHRONIC DISEASE; DATABASES AS TOPIC; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; NATIONAL HEALTH PROGRAMS; TRANSLATIONAL MEDICAL RESEARCH;

EID: 84863649785     PISSN: 01406736     EISSN: 1474547X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61179-9     Document Type: Letter

References (4)

1. Collins R. What makes the UK Biobank special? Lancet 2012; 379: 1173-74.
2. Manolio TA, Weis BK, Cowie CC, et al. New models for large prospective studies: is there a better way? Am J Epidemiol 2012; 175: 859-66.
3. Berkson J. Limitations of the application of fourfold table analysis to hospital data. Biometrics Bull 1946; 2: 47-53.
4. Hechtman JJ. Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica 1979; 47: 153-61.