Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Epidemiological studies in High Background Radiation Areas (HBRAs) offer the prospect of large study populations and therefore appear attractive as a way of obtaining information about the effects of low doses of ionising radiation. However, bias and confounding are problems in all epidemiological studies and their residual effects may make it very difficult to detect relative risks lower than about 1.4. The easiest studies to propose will often be of ecological design in which data are aggregated over a population, for example, those living in a particular area, rather than cohort or case/control studies, which use data for individuals. Ecological studies are subject to problems of correlations between aggregated disease rates and aggregated measures of exposure which do not arise with studies which use individual data on disease, exposures and other risk factors. UNSCEAR suggests that only cohort and case/control studies should be used in quantitative assessments of radiation risks. © 2005.

Original publication




Journal article


International Congress Series

Publication Date





166 - 168