PUB 540 GCU Effectiveness of Studies Used in Epidemiology Worksheet A premise of epidemiology is that health outcomes are not random occurrences within a p

PUB 540 GCU Effectiveness of Studies Used in Epidemiology Worksheet A premise of epidemiology is that health outcomes are not random occurrences within a population, but are linked to particular risk factors and diseases. Epidemiologists utilize a range of study design methods to evaluate evidence-based associations to understand and improve health outcomes. Use the specific Excel worksheets, located in the “Excel Study Design Workbook,” to complete this assignment.

Part 1: Study Design Comparison

Using the “Study Design Comparison Worksheet,” compare and contrast the characteristics of the different types of study design types discussed in this course. Survey and Medical records

Part 2: Article Comparison 

Consider an area of interest that you want to explore as a potential topic for your Epidemiological Profile project. Search for two articles that fit any two of the four study designs (randomized trial, cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional) pertaining to the interest area you chose. Review the articles provided in the “Study Design Resource Document” to practice identifying articles for each study design. (Do not use the actual articles listed in the “Study Design Resource Document” for this assignment.) Complete the “Article Comparison Worksheet” to compare the study design characteristics in each of your two articles. Include details of any gaps in the characteristics or identify if information is missing.

General Requirements

Upon completion of both worksheets, submit the “Excel Study Design Workbook.”

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

APA style is not required, but solid academic writing is expected.

PLEASE  READ INSTITUTION CAREFULLY ASSIGNMENT IS WORTH 120 POINT PUB 540 – Study Design Comparison Worksheet
Randomized Trial
Type: Descriptive or Analytic
Participant selection criteria (by
exposure status, outcome
status, randomized, or other)
Observation type (Prospective,
retrospective, or single time
point)
Data Sources (primary data,
surveys, secondary data,
medical records, other)
Measures of association
(prevalence/odds ratios,
incidence/relative risk)
Major strengths
Major weaknesses (sources of
bias, etc.)
Cohort Study
Case-Control Study
Cross-Sectional Study
PUB 540 – Article Comparison Worksheet
Topic of Interest:
Search Terms:
Article #1
Author, Year, Title
Article importance
Study design type
How were participants selected or
recruited?
How many participants? (state the
number of cases and controls or
exposes and unexposed)
If appropriate, how long was the
average length of follow-up?
What sources of data were used to
measure the exposure and outcome(s)?
How was the exposure defined or
measured?
How was the outcome defined or
measured?
What was the primary measure of
association or statistical method used?
(relative risk, odds ratio, logistic
regression, etc.)
How did the authors control for bias
and confounding?
What were the strengths of the study?
What were the weaknesses of the
study?
What were the primary findings and
conclusions?
Article #2
Study Design Resource Document
Randomized Trial Study Examples
1. Monti PM, Barnett NP, Colby, SM, et al. (2007) Motivational interviewing versus
feedback only in emergency care for young adult problem drinking.
http://www.coping.us/images/Monti_et_al_2007_Alcohol_Motiv_Interview.pdf
2. Sinharoy SS, Schmidt WP, Wendt R, et al. (2017) Effect of community health clubs on
child diarrhea in western Rwanda: a cluster-randomised controlled trial.
http://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/langlo/PIIS2214-109X(17)30217-6.pdf
3. Tham CK, Collins JSA, Malloy C, Sloan JM, Bamfoard KB, Watson RGP. (1996)
Randomized controlled trial of ranitidine versus omeprazole in combination with
antibiotics for eradication of Helicobacter pylori. https://www-ncbi-nlm-nihgov.lopes.idm.oclc.org/pmc/articles/PMC2448584/pdf/ulstermedj00066-0035.pdf
Cohort Study Examples
1. Allison M, Garland C, Chlebowski R, et al. (2006) The association between aspirin use
and the incidence of colorectal cancer in women.
https://academic.oup.com/aje/article/164/6/567/129968/The-Association-betweenAspirin-Use-and-the
2. Bazzano LA, He J, Ogden LG, et al. (2002) Fruit and vegetable intake and risk of
cardiovascular disease in US adults: the first National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey Epidemiologic Follow-up Study.
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/76/1/93.long
3. Sesso HD, Buring JE, Rifai N. (2003) C-Reactive protein and the risk of developing
hypertension. http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/197807
Case-Control Study Examples
1. Carton M, Barul C, Menvielle G, et al. (2017) Occupational exposure to solvents and
risk of head and neck cancer in women: a population-based case-control study in
France. http://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/7/1/e012833
2. Davila JA, Morgan RO, Shaib Y, McGlynn KA, El-Serag HB. (2005) Diabetes increases
the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma in the United Sates: a population based case
control study. https://www-ncbi-nlm-nihgov.lopes.idm.oclc.org/pmc/articles/PMC1774454/
3. Cramer DW, Vitonis VF, Terry KL, Welch WR, Titus LJ. (2016) The association
between talc use and ovarian cancer: a retrospective case-control study in two US
states. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4820665/
© 2017. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Cross-Sectional Study Examples
1. Nilsen P, Holmqvist M, Nordqvist C, Bendsten P. (2007) Linking drinking to injury –
a causal attribution of injury to alcohol intake among patients in a Swedish
emergency room.
http://www.tandfonline.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/doi/abs/10.1080/17457300701374759
2. Johnson JV, Hall EM. (1988) Job strain, work place social support, and
cardiovascular disease: a cross-sectional study of a random sample of the Swedish
working population. https://www-ncbi-nlm-nihgov.lopes.idm.oclc.org/pmc/articles/PMC1349434/
3. Elliott AM, Luo N, Tembo, G, et al. (1990) Impact of HIV on tuberculosis in Zambia:
a cross sectional study.
http://search.proquest.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/docview/1776431657?accountid=7374
2
Course Code
PUB-540
Class Code
PUB-540-O500
Criteria
Criteria
Percentage
100.0%
Study Comparison: Study Design and Methods
Assessment
15.0%
Study Comparison: Strengths and Weaknesses
15.0%
Article Comparison: Study Design and Methods
Assessment
20.0%
Article Comparison: Strengths, Weaknesses, and
Primary Findings
20.0%
Thesis Development and Purpose
7.0%
Argument Logic and Construction
8.0%
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling,
punctuation, grammar, language use)
5.0%
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the
major and assignment)
5.0%
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes,
references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to
assignment and style)
5.0%
Total Weightage
100%
Assignment Title
Effectiveness of Studies Used in Epidemiology
Unsatisfactory (0.00%)
Assessment of the design type, participant selection,
observation type, data sources, and measures of association
is not stated.
The major strengths and weaknesses are not stated.
Information on participant selection and number, follow-up,
data sources, measures, and control for bias and confounding
is not presented for any of the articles.
A description of the strengths, weaknesses, and primary
findings is not presented for any of the articles.
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing
claim.
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The
conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is
incoherent and uses noncredible sources.
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede
communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or
sentence construction is used.
Template is not used appropriately or documentation format
is rarely followed correctly.
Sources are not documented.
Total Points
120.0
Less than Satisfactory (74.00%)
An incomplete assessment of the design type, participant
selection, observation type, data sources, and measures of
association is presented. The assessment is missing key
components.
A summary of the major strengths and weaknesses is
presented. The summary is incomplete or contains major
inaccuracies.
Information on participant selection and number, follow-up,
data sources, measures, and control for bias and confounding
is presented for one of the articles but is incomplete or
contains major inaccuracies.
A description of the strengths, weaknesses, and primary
findings is presented for one of the articles but is incomplete
or contains major inaccuracies.
Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not
clear.
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks
consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some
sources have questionable credibility.
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the
reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word
choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not
varied.
Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing
or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as
appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous
formatting errors.
Satisfactory (79.00%)
Assessment of the design type, participant selection,
observation type, data sources, and measures of association
is described. Major details are lacking or are inaccurate.
A description of the major strengths and weaknesses of each
study is generally described. More detail is required to fully
present the strengths and weaknesses. There are some
inaccuracies.
Information on participant selection and number, follow-up,
data sources, measures, and control for bias and confounding
is identified for each article but is incomplete or inaccurate.
A description of the strengths, weaknesses, and primary
findings is presented for each of the articles but incomplete
or inaccurate.
Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.
Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The
argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument
logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources
used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the
thesis.
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are
not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied
sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are
employed.
Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although
some minor errors may be present.
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and
style, although some formatting errors may be present.
Good (87.00%)
Assessment of the design type, participant selection,
observation type, data sources, and measures of association
is described and most details are accurate.
A description of the major strengths and weaknesses of each
study is described. Some detail is required for clarity.
Information on participant selection and number, follow-up,
data sources, measures, and control for bias and confounding
is presented for each article. Details are mostly accurate.
A description of the strengths, weaknesses, and primary
findings is presented for each of the articles and is mostly
accurate.
Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper.
Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and
appropriate to the purpose.
Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of
argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of
claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are
authoritative.
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may
be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence
structures and figures of speech.
Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no
errors in formatting style.
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and
style, and format is mostly correct.
Excellent (100.00%)
Assessment of the design type, participant selection,
observation type, data sources, and measures of association
is described in detail. Discussion is very clear and accurate for
each study design.
A detailed description of the major strengths and weaknesses
of each study is well presented. Information is thoroughly
presented that provides insight into how the strengths and
weaknesses are associated with each study design.
Information on participant selection and number, follow-up,
data sources, measures, and control for bias and confounding
is clearly identified and stated for each article. Details are
accurate and a thorough explanation is provided.
A description of the strengths, weaknesses, and primary
findings is presented and accurate for each study type.
Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the
paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper
clear.
Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive
claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are
authoritative.
Comments
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic
English.
All format elements are correct.
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as
appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of
error.
Points Earned

Purchase answer to see full
attachment