Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding01:25

Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding

Confounding is a critical issue in epidemiological studies, often leading to misleading conclusions about associations between exposures and outcomes. It occurs when the relationship between the exposure and the outcome is mixed with the effects of other factors that influence the outcome. Given that, addressing confounding is of high importance for drawing accurate inferences in research.
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches01:23

Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches

Biopharmaceutical studies constitute a vital field aiming to enhance drug delivery methods and refine therapeutic approaches, drawing upon diverse interdisciplinary knowledge. In research methodologies, the choice between controlled and non-controlled studies significantly influences the study's reliability and accuracy.
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
Confounding in Epidemiological Studies01:27

Confounding in Epidemiological Studies

Confounding in statistical epidemiology represents a pivotal challenge, referring to the distortion in the perceived relationship between an exposure and an outcome due to the presence of a third variable, known as a confounder. This variable is associated with both the exposure and the outcome but is not a direct link in their causal chain. Its presence can lead to erroneous interpretations of the exposure's effect, either exaggerating or underestimating the true association. This phenomenon...
Bias in Epidemiological Studies01:29

Bias in Epidemiological Studies

Biases can arise at various stages of research, from study design and data collection to analysis and interpretation. Recognizing and addressing these biases is essential to ensure the validity and reliability of epidemiological findings.Broadly speaking, biases in epidemiology fall into three main categories: selection bias, information bias, and confounding. A more detailed description of possible biases is:
Controls in Experiments01:13

Controls in Experiments

When conducting an experiment, it is crucial to have control to reduce bias and accurately measure the dependent variables. It also marks the results more reliable. Controls are elements in an experiment that have the same characteristics as the treatment groups but are not affected by the independent variable. By sorting these data into control and experimental conditions, the relationship between the dependent and independent variables can be drawn. A randomized experiment always includes a...
Bias01:22

Bias

Bias refers to any tendency that prevents a question from being considered unprejudiced. In research, bias occurs when one outcome or answer is selected or encouraged over others in sampling or testing. Bias can occur during any research phase, including study design, data collection, analysis, and publication.
In statistics, a sampling bias is created when a sample is collected from a population, and some members of the population are not as likely to be chosen as others (remember, each member...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

AI-assisted image analysis of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes as a prognostic marker in chemotherapy-naïve luminal breast cancer.

NPJ breast cancer·2026
Same author

Artificial Intelligence for histopathological diagnosis and grading of breast cancer in Ethiopia.

Pathology, research and practice·2026
Same author

Level of estrogen receptor expression, histological grade, and computationally assessed stromal TILs on pre-treatment biopsies predict pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in ER-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer.

Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology·2026
Same author

Validation of a deep learning-based AI model for breast cancer risk stratification in postmenopausal ER+/HER2-breast cancer patients.

Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland)·2025
Same author

Pathological response to pembrolizumab-based neoadjuvant therapy in ER-low vs. ER-zero breast cancer: a Swedish population-based cohort study.

Breast cancer research : BCR·2025
Same author

Breaking down the costs for breast cancer: Insights from Sweden's national quality register.

Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland)·2025

Related Experiment Videos

Accounting for control mislabeling in case-control biomarker studies.

Mattias Rantalainen1, Chris C Holmes

  • 1Department of Statistics, University of Oxford, 1 South Parks Road, Oxford, OX1 3TG, United Kingdom.

Journal of Proteome Research
|October 21, 2011
PubMed
Summary

Biomarker studies often ignore label uncertainty, biasing results. Modified statistical models can correct this, improving prediction accuracy and meta-analysis for biomarker discovery.

Related Experiment Videos

Area of Science:

  • Biostatistics
  • Epidemiology
  • Biomarker Discovery

Background:

  • Uncertainty in case and control labels is frequently overlooked in biomarker discovery.
  • Ignoring label uncertainty can severely bias model parameters and predictive risk estimates.
  • This bias is particularly problematic for model calibration and meta-analysis.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the impact of label uncertainty on biomarker discovery models.
  • To propose modifications to statistical models to account for label uncertainty.
  • To improve the accuracy of prediction performance estimates and reduce bias in meta-analysis.

Main Methods:

  • Utilized a simulation study to assess the effects of label uncertainty.
  • Adapted conventional statistical models to incorporate uncertainty in control group labels.
  • Focused on mislabeled control subjects in case-control studies.

Main Results:

  • Failure to account for label uncertainty leads to underestimation of classification performance.
  • Bias in parameter estimates and reduced accuracy in meta-analysis were observed.
  • Modified models yielded well-calibrated prediction performance estimates and reduced meta-analysis bias.

Conclusions:

  • Addressing class label uncertainty is crucial for reliable biomarker discovery.
  • Modified statistical approaches enhance prediction accuracy and meta-analysis validity.
  • This methodology is broadly applicable, especially in genomic and molecular epidemiology.