Journal of the National Cancer Institute Advance Access originally published online on July 8, 2008
JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2008 100(14):988-995; doi:10.1093/jnci/djn191
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
COMMENTARY |
False-Positive Results in Cancer Epidemiology: A Plea for Epistemological Modesty
Affiliations of authors: Lifestyle, Environment and Cancer Group, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France (PB); International Epidemiology Institute, Rockville, MD (JKM, RET, LL, WJB); Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN (JKM, RET, LL, WJB); Laboratory of Epidemiology, Mario Negri Institute, Milan, Italy (CLV); Institute of Medical Statistics and Biometry, University of Milan, Milan, Italy (CLV)
Correspondence to: Paolo Boffetta, MD, PhD, Lifestyle, Environment and Cancer Group, International Agency for Research on Cancer, 150 cours Albert Thomas, 69008 Lyon, France (e-mail: boffetta{at}iarc.fr).
False-positive results are inherent in the scientific process of testing hypotheses concerning the determinants of cancer and other human illnesses. Although much of what is known about the etiology of human cancers has arisen from well-conducted epidemiological studies, epidemiology has been increasingly criticized for producing findings that are often sensationalized in the media and fail to be upheld in subsequent studies. Herein we describe examples from cancer epidemiology of likely false-positive findings and discuss conditions under which such results may occur. We suggest general guidelines or principles, including the endorsement of editorial policies requiring the prominent listing of study caveats, which may help reduce the reporting of misleading results. Increased epistemological humility regarding findings in epidemiology would go a long way to diminishing the detrimental effects of false-positive results on the allocation of limited research resources, on the advancement of knowledge of the causes and prevention of cancer, and on the scientific reputation of epidemiology and would help to prevent oversimplified interpretations of results by the media and the public.
Manuscript received March 3, 2008; revised April 24, 2008; accepted May 16, 2008.
Related Articles in JNCI
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
J Natl Cancer Inst 2008 100: 975.
J Natl Cancer Inst 2008 100: 975.
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  P. Vineis Viewpoint: The skeptical epidemiologist Int. J. Epidemiol., June 1, 2009; 38(3): 675 - 677. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. Boffetta, J. K McLaughlin, C. La Vecchia, R. E Tarone, L. Lipworth, and W. J Blot Authors' Response: A further plea for adherence to the principles underlying science in general and the epidemiologic enterprise in particular Int. J. Epidemiol., June 1, 2009; 38(3): 678 - 679. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 L. A. Mucci and H.-O. Adami The Plight of the Potato: Is Dietary Acrylamide a Risk Factor for Human Cancer? J Natl Cancer Inst, May 6, 2009; 101(9): 618 - 621. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. S S Young Acknowledge and fix the multiple testing problem Int. J. Epidemiol., April 17, 2009; (2009) dyp188v1. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. W. Clapp and D. Kriebel Re: False-Positive Results in Cancer Epidemiology: A Plea for Epistemological Modesty J Natl Cancer Inst, February 4, 2009; 101(3): 211 - 212. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. Crosignani Re: False-Positive Results in Cancer Epidemiology: A Plea for Epistemological Modesty J Natl Cancer Inst, February 4, 2009; 101(3): 212 - 213. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|