Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 25, 2025

Working with Human Tissues for Translational Cancer Research
Published on: November 26, 2015
Population designations in biomedical research: Limitations and perspectives.
Caroline Gombault1, Guillaume Grenet1,2, Laure Segurel1
1Laboratoire de Biométrie et Biologie Evolutive, Université Lyon 1, UMR CNRS 5558, Lyon, France.
Biomedical research struggles with inconsistent and imprecise subpopulation labeling, hindering the study of disease variations. Developing standardized, scientifically rigorous labeling practices is crucial for accurate research on human heterogeneity.
Area of Science:
- Biomedical research
- Population genetics
- Medical ethics
Background:
- Population differences in disease frequency, severity, and treatment response are critical in biomedical research.
- Current subpopulation labeling practices in clinical research lack rigor, exhibiting inconsistencies and methodological issues.
- Broad and heterogeneous group designations (e.g., "Black", "Asian") and obsolete terms (e.g., "Caucasian") are imprecise.
Purpose of the Study:
- To highlight the critical need for more rigorous and scientifically accurate subpopulation labeling in biomedical research.
- To address the inconsistencies and methodological flaws in reporting population differences.
- To advocate for improved policies and practices for labeling human heterogeneity in clinical studies.
Main Methods:
- Critical analysis of current practices in subpopulation labeling within biomedical and clinical research.
- Review of the heterogeneity and imprecision associated with common demographic labels like "race" and "ethnicity".
- Exploration of the potential for other factors to be overlooked when "race/ethnicity" is used as a proxy.
Main Results:
- Subpopulation labeling is characterized by significant disparities, methodological issues, and a lack of scientific rigor.
- Existing labels are often broad, heterogeneous, and imprecise, failing to reflect scientific hypotheses accurately.
- The use of "race/ethnicity" can distract from investigating other crucial factors like environmental exposures and cultural habits.
Conclusions:
- There is an urgent need to promote adequate and scientifically reflective labeling practices in biomedical research.
- Developing consensus and policies for subpopulation labeling requires interdisciplinary collaboration among geneticists, sociologists, anthropologists, and ethicists.
- Improved labeling is essential for accurately understanding and addressing human heterogeneity in health and disease.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Analysis of Population Pharmacokinetic Data
Longitudinal Research
Mechanistic Models: Compartment Models in Individual and Population Analysis
Bias in Epidemiological Studies
What is Population Genetics?

