Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2022 Oct 27;12(10):e061497.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-061497.

Studies of prevalence: how a basic epidemiology concept has gained recognition in the COVID-19 pandemic

Affiliations
Review

Studies of prevalence: how a basic epidemiology concept has gained recognition in the COVID-19 pandemic

Diana Buitrago-Garcia et al. BMJ Open. .

Abstract

Background: Prevalence measures the occurrence of any health condition, exposure or other factors related to health. The experience of COVID-19, a new disease caused by SARS-CoV-2, has highlighted the importance of prevalence studies, for which issues of reporting and methodology have traditionally been neglected.

Objective: This communication highlights key issues about risks of bias in the design and conduct of prevalence studies and in reporting them, using examples about SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19.

Summary: The two main domains of bias in prevalence studies are those related to the study population (selection bias) and the condition or risk factor being assessed (information bias). Sources of selection bias should be considered both at the time of the invitation to take part in a study and when assessing who participates and provides valid data (respondents and non-respondents). Information bias appears when there are systematic errors affecting the accuracy and reproducibility of the measurement of the condition or risk factor. Types of information bias include misclassification, observer and recall bias. When reporting prevalence studies, clear descriptions of the target population, study population, study setting and context, and clear definitions of the condition or risk factor and its measurement are essential. Without clear reporting, the risks of bias cannot be assessed properly. Bias in the findings of prevalence studies can, however, impact decision-making and the spread of disease. The concepts discussed here can be applied to the assessment of prevalence for many other conditions.

Conclusions: Efforts to strengthen methodological research and improve assessment of the risk of bias and the quality of reporting of studies of prevalence in all fields of research should continue beyond this pandemic.

Keywords: COVID-19; EPIDEMIOLOGY; STATISTICS & RESEARCH METHODS.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Potential for selection bias and information bias in prevalence studies. Coloured lines relate to the coloured boxes, showing at which stage of study procedures selection bias (blue line) and information bias (purple line) can occur.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Porta M. A dictionary of epidemiology. 6th Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780199976720.001.000...
    1. Rothman KJ, Greenland S, Lash TL. Measures of Occurrence. In: Rothman KJ, Greenland S, eds. Modern epidemiology. Boston, Massachusetts: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2020: 32–50.
    1. Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) . The global burden of disease study: University of Washington, 2020. Available: http://www.healthdata.org/gbd/about [Accessed 10 Oct 2022].
    1. GBD 2019 Diseases and Injuries Collaborators . Global burden of 369 diseases and injuries in 204 countries and territories, 1990-2019: a systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2019. Lancet 2020;396:1204–22. 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30925-9 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hoffmann F, Eggers D, Pieper D, et al. An observational study found large methodological heterogeneity in systematic reviews addressing prevalence and cumulative incidence. J Clin Epidemiol 2020;119:92–9. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.12.003 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types