INTH
Rats - CORRECT ANSWERRelevance, Appropriateness of design, Transparency,
soundness of analysis
Relevance - CORRECT ANSWERrelevant research question to public health, clinical
practice and policy
Appropriateness of design - CORRECT ANSWERis this the best approach for the
topic? FGD, Interviews, observation, etc
Transparency - CORRECT ANSWERPosition
reflexivity
Sampling
recruitment
data collection
ethics
Soundness - CORRECT ANSWERanalysis
Inductive or deductive theme identification
Evidence of alternative explanations sought
Present and analyse deviant cases
Selection Bias - CORRECT ANSWERbias to do with prcedures for selection or factors
that influence LTFU, response
exposed and unexposed individu- als, were selected is such that an apparent
association is observed—even if, in reality, exposure and disease are not associated
-LTFU, compensation bias, response bias
Information Bias - CORRECT ANSWERproblems with measurement or data processing
poor sensitivity/specificify, misclassification, recall,interviewer bias, reporting bias
, Counterfactual ideal - CORRECT ANSWERTo determine causality it would be ideal to
follow people
over time and simultaneously compare them with themselves as exposed and
unexposed
only difference would be the exposure
Case control - CORRECT ANSWEROR
start with outcome and find expsoures
Pros:quick, cheap, rare outcomes
Cons: -not good for rare exposure
-recall bias
-Sampling bias
-measurement bias
-Survivor bias
-temporality!!
Cohort - CORRECT ANSWERRR/AR
start with exposure/nonexposure and follow up to outcome
Pros: temporality, multiple exposures/risk factors, rare exposure
cons: expensive, not goof for rare diseases, LTFU, nonparticipation
retrospective cohort study - CORRECT ANSWERIRR or RR
subjects are sampled after the outcome has occurred, based
on exposure status
pros:
rare exposure and disease, quick and cheap,
cons
need complete data on confounding, difficult without vital registry
cross sectional - CORRECT ANSWERPR/
outcome and exposure measured at one point in time
pros
-cheap & quick
Cons
-temporality cannot be established
-information bias: meas, instrument bias
-selection bias: non response, refusal
Nested case control - CORRECT ANSWEROR
select cases that emerge from cohort
Pros:
-lower risk of recall bias
-efficient, cost effective
intervention study (RCT) - CORRECT ANSWERRisk difference, absolute effect of
exposure, IRR
Rats - CORRECT ANSWERRelevance, Appropriateness of design, Transparency,
soundness of analysis
Relevance - CORRECT ANSWERrelevant research question to public health, clinical
practice and policy
Appropriateness of design - CORRECT ANSWERis this the best approach for the
topic? FGD, Interviews, observation, etc
Transparency - CORRECT ANSWERPosition
reflexivity
Sampling
recruitment
data collection
ethics
Soundness - CORRECT ANSWERanalysis
Inductive or deductive theme identification
Evidence of alternative explanations sought
Present and analyse deviant cases
Selection Bias - CORRECT ANSWERbias to do with prcedures for selection or factors
that influence LTFU, response
exposed and unexposed individu- als, were selected is such that an apparent
association is observed—even if, in reality, exposure and disease are not associated
-LTFU, compensation bias, response bias
Information Bias - CORRECT ANSWERproblems with measurement or data processing
poor sensitivity/specificify, misclassification, recall,interviewer bias, reporting bias
, Counterfactual ideal - CORRECT ANSWERTo determine causality it would be ideal to
follow people
over time and simultaneously compare them with themselves as exposed and
unexposed
only difference would be the exposure
Case control - CORRECT ANSWEROR
start with outcome and find expsoures
Pros:quick, cheap, rare outcomes
Cons: -not good for rare exposure
-recall bias
-Sampling bias
-measurement bias
-Survivor bias
-temporality!!
Cohort - CORRECT ANSWERRR/AR
start with exposure/nonexposure and follow up to outcome
Pros: temporality, multiple exposures/risk factors, rare exposure
cons: expensive, not goof for rare diseases, LTFU, nonparticipation
retrospective cohort study - CORRECT ANSWERIRR or RR
subjects are sampled after the outcome has occurred, based
on exposure status
pros:
rare exposure and disease, quick and cheap,
cons
need complete data on confounding, difficult without vital registry
cross sectional - CORRECT ANSWERPR/
outcome and exposure measured at one point in time
pros
-cheap & quick
Cons
-temporality cannot be established
-information bias: meas, instrument bias
-selection bias: non response, refusal
Nested case control - CORRECT ANSWEROR
select cases that emerge from cohort
Pros:
-lower risk of recall bias
-efficient, cost effective
intervention study (RCT) - CORRECT ANSWERRisk difference, absolute effect of
exposure, IRR
