In epidemiological research, recall bias is a systematic error caused by differences in the accuracy or completeness of the recollections retrieved ("recalled") by study participants regarding events or experiences from the past. Sometimes also referred to as response bias, responder bias or reporting bias, this type of measurement bias can be a methodological issue in research involving interviews or questionnaires, in which case it could lead to misclassification of various types of exposure. Recall bias is of particular concern in retrospective studies that use a case-control design to investigate the etiology of a disease or psychiatric condition. For example, in studies of risk factors for breast cancer, women who have had the disease may search their memories more thoroughly than members of the unaffected control group for possible causes of their cancer. Those in the case group (those with breast cancer) may be able to recall a greater number of potential risk factors they had been exposed to than those in the control group (women unaffected by breast cancer). This can potentially exaggerate the relation between a potential risk factor and the disease. To minimize recall bias, some clinical trials have adopted a "wash out period", i.e., a substantial time period that must elapse between the subject's first observation and their subsequent observation of the same event.
- Last, John M, ed. (30 November 2000). A Dictionary of Epidemiology. Oxford University Press. p. 153. ISBN 978-0-19-977434-0. Retrieved 28 March 2013.
- Moren, Alain; Valenciano, Marta (Kitching, Aileen, ed.). "Information (measurement) bias". Field Epidemiology Manual. FEM Wiki. Retrieved 28 March 2013.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
- Kopec, JA; Esdaile, JM (September 1990). "Bias in case-control studies. A review". Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health. 44 (3): 179–86. doi:10.1136/jech.44.3.179. PMC 1060638. PMID 2273353.
- Schulz, KF; Grimes, DA (February 2, 2002). "Case-control studies: research in reverse" (PDF). Lancet. 359 (9304): 431–4. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(02)07605-5. PMID 11844534. Archived from the original on June 15, 2016. Cite uses deprecated parameter
|deadurl=(help)CS1 maint: BOT: original-url status unknown (link)
- Mukhopadhyay, Sanjay; Feldman, Michael; Abels, Esther (2017). "Whole slide imaging versus microscopy for primary diagnosis in surgical pathology: a multicenter randomized blinded noninferiority study of 1992 cases (pivotal study)". American Journal of Surgical Pathology. Epub ahead of print: 39–52. doi:10.1097/PAS.0000000000000948. PMC 5737464. PMID 28961557.