DOCSLIB.ORG

Death by Scientific Method: Estimated Mortality Associated with the Failure

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Death by Scientific Method: Estimated Mortality Associated with the Failure medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.20.20216242; this version posted October 22, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. 1 Death by scientific method: Estimated mortality associated with the failure to conduct routine prospective cumulative systematic reviews in medicine and public health Robert A. Hahn,1 Steven M. Teutsch2 1Corresponding author: Department of Anthropology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia. Email: [email protected] 2Adjunct Professor, UCLA Fielding School of Public Health; Senior Fellow, Leonard D. Schaef- fer Center for Health Policy and Economics, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California Abstract Failure to routinely assess the state of knowledge as new studies accumulate results in 1) non-use of effective interventions, 2) continued use of ineffective or harmful interventions, and 3) unnecessary research. We use a published cumulative meta-analysis of interventions to reduce the harms of acute myocardial infarctions (1966-1992), and applied population attributable risk to assess the mortality consequences of the failure to cumulatively assess the state of knowledge. Failure to use knowledge that would have been available with cumulative meta-analysis may have resulted in annual estimated mortality: 41,000 deaths from non-use of intravenous dilators, 35,000 deaths from non-use of aspirin, and 37,000 deaths annually from non-use of ß-blockers. Continued use of Class 1 anti-arrhythmic drugs, which would have been found to be harmful in 1981, resulted 39,000 deaths annually. Failure to routinely update the state knowledge can have NOTE: This preprint reports new research that has not been certified by peer review and should not be used to guide clinical practice. medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.20.20216242; this version posted October 22, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. 2 large health consequences. The process of building knowledge and practice in medicine and public health needs fundamental revision. medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.20.20216242; this version posted October 22, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. 3 Introduction Practitioners of medicine and public health presumably seek to act on the basis of the best available knowledge of whatever condition they are treating. They may resort to established practice or to the findings of a recent or widely cited publication.(1) Both of these approaches can be problematic. Theorists of science agree(2, 3) that the best available knowledge is ascer- tained by means of systematic reviews—often meta-analyses—which gather available studies of given questions (meeting specified standards), evaluate these studies (using explicit criteria), and synthesize the resulting body of evidence (with a standardized process) to determine the state of collective knowledge on the question. Systematic review can find that the evidence available is insufficient to draw a conclusion, or that available evidence of various strengths supports or negates a conclusion. The systematic review indicates the weight of available evidence to date on given quesons—a critical component in the decision of a course of action. While use of systematic reviews for “evidence-based practice” has grown in recent decades, it is not routine, and the practice of prospective cumulative systematic reviews, i.e., adding each new study of a topic to an ongoing—thus cumulative—systematic review is rare. Nor is it clear that when such systematic evidence is available, it is readily accessible and used by practitioners.(4) In this paper we use available cumulative systematic reviews to estimate the mortality conse- quences of failure to routinely conduct cumulative systematic reviews and continually translate their findings into practice. Available cumulative systematic reviews examine what might have happened had ongoing systematic reviews been conducted and the findings deployed in practice. medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.20.20216242; this version posted October 22, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. 4 We conclude by recommending routine prospective cumulative systematic reviews to promote those benefits. Recommendations for this practice have been made for more than 25 years,(5, 6) without substantial uptake by the research community in either medicine or public health. Methods Our analysis centers on the classic study by Antman and colleagues(5) (7) which con- ducted retrospective cumulative meta-analyses on 15 interventions to reduce mortality among patients who had suffered acute myocardial infarctions; the study search period ran from 1966 to 1991. We assessed mortality associated with 3 interventions in the Antman study indicating ben- efit: intravenous vasodilators (nitroglycerin and nitroprusside) administered during hospitaliza- tion, and ß-blockers and aspirin administered both during hospitalization and for secondary pre- vention after hospital discharge. We also assessed the consequences of one intervention shown by cumulative meta-analysis to be harmful for routine use in the treatment of acute myocardial infarctions—Class 1 anti-arrhythmic drugs; because this harm was unrecognized, the harmful practice continued.(5) Antman’s study provides three critical pieces of information: 1. the year in which the ongoing, cumulative meta analysis first indicated benefit (or harm) at a chosen level of statistical significance 2. the effect size determined—commonly an odds ratio indicating the proportion of mor- tality reduced by the intervention compared with placebo or no intervention, and medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.20.20216242; this version posted October 22, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. 5 3. the year in which the intervention became routine in practice (or was eliminated in practice because it is harmful or ineffective). Routine practice was assessed by examination of samples of published review papers and texts on treatment for myocardial infarction in each year over recent decades. Review papers and textbook statements were classified as: a) recommending routine use, b) recommending use in specific circumstances, c) recommending rare use or nonuse, d) experimental, or e) use not men- tioned. We used information about mortality from acute myocardial infarction before, during, and after hospitalization to estimate mortality associated with failure to use information on benefits (or harms) of interventions that were not used (or were used) because cumulative systematic reviews had not been conducted, so that the requisite knowledge was not available. Deaths from my- ocardial infarction occurring prior to hospitalization were excluded from the analysis because they would not have been subject to the interventions under study. Deaths that occurred after hospital admission and after hospital discharge were included because they might have been ad- dressed by the interventions for either acute or longer-term treatment. While rates and numbers of deaths associated with myocardial infarction have changed over the study period, we use the number of deaths at the approximate midpoint of the study period, i.e., 1980 to estimate at- tributable mortality. medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.20.20216242; this version posted October 22, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. 6 We use the epidemiological method of population attributable risk (PAR) to estimate the number of deaths that might have been averted had the intervention discovered retrospectively by cumu- lative meta analysis been known. PAR = Pe (RR-1) / ((Pe (RR-1)) + 1), where Pe is the prevalence of nonuse of the practice we are assessing, and RR is the relative risk of the outcome, i.e., death in this case, associated with nonuse of the practice, compared with use, i.e., the number of deaths that might have been averted with use of the preventive measure in question. We assess the consequences of 100% prevalence of nonuse of the preventive mea- sure. Thus, Pe drops from the equation, and the equation becomes simply PAR = (RR-1) / RR. In sensitivity analyses, we assess the benefits of partial adoption, i.e., Pe <100%, or changing other parameters. The RR is the inverse of the odds ratio associated with the benefit of each in- tervention explored and reported in Lau.(7) Results and Discussion Mortality associated
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Basic Epidemiology for BPSU Studies
    BPSU Study guidance – Basic epidemiology for BPSU studies Dr Simon Lenton on behalf of the Scientific Committee of the British Paediatric Surveillance Unit Updated 07 01 19 BPSU parent bodies: with support from: 1 Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................. 3 Concepts of disease development ..................................................................... 3 Public health surveillance ...................................................................................... 4 Epidemiology ............................................................................................................. 4 Descriptive epidemiology ...................................................................................... 5 Analytic epidemiology ............................................................................................ 5 Triangulation (cross verification) ........................................................................ 6 Capture-recapture .................................................................................................... 6 BPSU research design ............................................................................................. 6 BPSU resources .......................................................................................................... 9 Appendix .................................................................................................................... 10 References ................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Early Epidemiological Assessment of the Virulence of Emerging Infectious Diseases: a Case Study of an Influenza Pandemic
    Early Epidemiological Assessment of the Virulence of Emerging Infectious Diseases: A Case Study of an Influenza Pandemic Hiroshi Nishiura1*, Don Klinkenberg1, Mick Roberts2, Johan A. P. Heesterbeek1 1 Theoretical Epidemiology, University of Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands, 2 Centre for Mathematical Biology, Institute of Information and Mathematical Sciences, Massey University, Auckland, New Zealand Abstract Background: The case fatality ratio (CFR), the ratio of deaths from an infectious disease to the number of cases, provides an assessment of virulence. Calculation of the ratio of the cumulative number of deaths to cases during the course of an epidemic tends to result in a biased CFR. The present study develops a simple method to obtain an unbiased estimate of confirmed CFR (cCFR), using only the confirmed cases as the denominator, at an early stage of epidemic, even when there have been only a few deaths. Methodology/Principal Findings: Our method adjusts the biased cCFR by a factor of underestimation which is informed by the time from symptom onset to death. We first examine the approach by analyzing an outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome in Hong Kong (2003) with known unbiased cCFR estimate, and then investigate published epidemiological datasets of novel swine-origin influenza A (H1N1) virus infection in the USA and Canada (2009). Because observation of a few deaths alone does not permit estimating the distribution of the time from onset to death, the uncertainty is addressed by means of sensitivity analysis. The maximum likelihood estimate of the unbiased cCFR for influenza may lie in the range of 0.16–4.48% within the assumed parameter space for a factor of underestimation.
    [Show full text]
  • Case-Control Studies
    Case-control studies Ph.D. course University of Copenhagen March 7, 2005 Aims • Definition of case-control studies • Know the difference between case-control and cohort studies • Describe odds ratio • Know the principles for selection of controls • Be aware of bias and confounding in CC-studies • Describe advantages and disadvantages of CC-studies How are you going to test, if • Amyl nitrite (’Poppers’) is the cause of Kaposi’s sarcoma? – Case-control • Hospitalisation with hip fracture is the cause of lung embolus? – Case-control • Smoking is the cause of lung cancer? – Case-control • Use of childcare centres is a cause of respiratory tract infections? – Cohort study • Viagra acts against erectile dysfunction? – Randomised controlled study 1 The question (hypothesis) determines the method • The method dependes (among others) of –Type ofdisease – Frequency of disease – Characteristics of affected persons – Diagnostic methods Analytical study types • Determination of causes and effects •Observational – Cohort studies –Case-controlstudies • Interventional studies – Randomised, controlled studies Cohort studies • Cohort: Cohors (latin): 1/10 of a legion • Prospective (!) • Starting point a population of healthy TIME Sick Exposed Persons Healthy Population without disease Sick Non-exposed Healthy 2 Outcome in cohort study: Relative risk Sick Healthy Total Exposed A B A + B Non- C D C + D exposed Total A + C B + D A + B + C + D A Relative risk = A + B C C + D With other words: Cohort studies measure • Risk of disease among the exposed compared
    [Show full text]
  • Download Download
    DRYWALL MUD AND MUDDY DOCTRINE: HOW NOT TO DECIDE A MULTIPLE-EXPOSURE MESOTHELIOMA CASE STEVE C. GOLD* INTRODUCTION Courts have a long history of stuffing policy considerations into the causation element of tort claims.1 High stakes and causal complexity especially elicit such doctrinal misdirection. Toxic tort claims exemplify these traits as much as any type of claim in contemporary tort law. So it comes as no surprise to find judicial policy preferences at or just below the surface in many court opinions that nominally address only whether the plaintiff has proven that the defendant caused the plaintiff’s harm.2 Judicial decisions have consequences. Stare decisis and the influence exerted by some courts magnify the effects. A court sets a precedent in response to a perceived policy imperative. The precedent is then applied (perhaps borrowed by another jurisdiction) in a second case that it doesn’t fit quite as well and is then extended to a third case with unexpected, unjust, or unintelligible results. So it comes as no surprise that when courts misapprehend or misuse factual causation principles, practical concerns are as much at stake as is the theoretical coherence of doctrine. Scholarship has—or should have—consequences, too. Hard problems and novel issues stimulate academic research. Toxic torts have presented plenty of both, and factual causation has proven to be the most durable, controversial, and intractable difficulty in toxic tort cases. So it comes as no surprise that toxic tort causation has generated a sizable body of legal scholarship, some of which has * Professor of Law and Judge Raymond J.
    [Show full text]
  • Notable Minimum Value of Relative Risk Recognized by Japanese Epidemiologists and Rule of Proof in Civil Trial: Questionnaire Survey
    ORIGINAL ARTICLE Notable Minimum Value of Relative Risk Recognized by Japanese Epidemiologists and Rule of Proof in Civil Trial: Questionnaire Survey Minoru Sugita, Shaw Watanabe1, Masao Kanamori and Takashi Izuno Department of Environmental and Occupational Health, Toho University School of Medicine and 1Division of Epidemiology, National Cancer Center Research Institute, Tokyo, Japan (Received for publication on March 11, 1993) Abstract. Members of The Japanese Society of Cancer Epidemiology were questioned about relative risk in cancer epidemiology. The notable minimum value of relative risk recognized by the epidemiologists distributed from 1.1 to 5.0, and the mean and the standard deviation of the notable minimum value were 1.92 and 0.760. In civil litigation of United States a plaintiff must prove one's case by a "preponderance of evidence," which means that a causal relationship between risk factors and a health disturbance to a plaintiff is proved when relative risk is 2.0 or more. The mean value 1.92 of the notable minimum value of relative risk nearly corresponded to the relative risk 2.0, which indicates that opinion of Japanese epidemiologists did not disagree with the rule of the proof in civil litigation of United States. It is mentioned that the standard of the proof should be "high probability" based on "a high level of conviction in the judge's own mind" in Japanese civil trials, and that the "high probability" means that relative risk is 5.0 or more if we dare to quantify the vagueness. This value corresponded to the maximum value of the notable minimum relative risk in the questionnaire to the Japanese epidemiologists.
    [Show full text]
  • Epidemiology and Mental Disorder: a Review
    J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry: first published as 10.1136/jnnp.27.4.277 on 1 August 1964. Downloaded from J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiat., 1964, 27, 277 Epidemiology and mental disorder: A review MICHAEL SHEPHERD AND BRIAN COOPER From the Institute ofPsychiatry, the Maudsley Hospital, London Though it is now fashionable to speak of the demiology were in circulation before 1914, the year epidemiology of mental illness, this conjunction of in which Goldberger published the first of a series of terms appeared in the literature only rarely before papers which were to demonstrate beyond argument 1949, when it was chosen as the title of a conference the professional epidemiologist's contribution to the organized by the Milbank Memorial Fund to ex- study of mental illness. There were several well- plore common ground between psychiatrists and documented accounts of the so-called psychic epi- public health workers (Milbank Memorial Fund, demics. The development of intelligence testing and 1950). Since then a spate of publications, especially the early studies of suicide had established the value in North America, the Scandinavian countries, and ofthe ecologist's method; and the older psychiatrists, the United Kingdom, has signalized the confluence as Lewis has pointed out, were familiar with such of two medical disciplines. The number of these in- basic epidemiological themes as the relationship vestigations is now so large, and their nature so between mental disorder and migration, isolation, varied, that it is advisable to demarcate the bound- occupation, and socio-economic change (Lewis, aries of psychiatric epidemiology. In Britain this task 1962). has been made easier by the cataloguing of current In view of these promising trends, it is of more Protected by copyright.
    [Show full text]
  • Epidemiological Bulletin Pan American Health Organization: Celebrating 100 Years of Health
    Epidemiological Bulletin Pan American Health Organization: Celebrating 100 Years of Health Vol. 23, No. 3 September 2002 Demographic and Mortality Trends in the Region of the Americas, 1980-2000 This year, the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) impacts on the population’s mortality profile by both com- celebrates a century of work towards coordinating efforts of municable and non-communicable diseases and external caus- the countries to improve health in the most vulnerable popu- es. It is especially evident in the more susceptible population lations of the Americas. In carrying out this effort, one of the groups such as the poor or elderly. The resulting pattern of essential functions of the Organization during this period mortality magnifies the presence of significant health gaps has been the collection, analysis, and dissemination of infor- between different social groups and geographic areas within mation on health among the Member States. As part of its countries.4 Considering the complex dynamics of the Region’s constitutional mandates, PAHO prepares since 1954 a qua- demographic and health conditions in the Region, the aim of drennial report on the health situation and trends in the Amer- the present article is to describe important markers of the icas. Since 1998, this report is published under the title of “demographic transition” process within the Americas, sin- “Health in the Americas.”1 Its 2002 edition was presented in gling out the changes in relevant indicators in recent years. the previous issue of this Bulletin. This publication contains DATA SOURCES: This analysis is based on PAHO’s core health PAHO’s analysis of different public health aspects of the data, using countries from the American Region as geographic population and the organized responses of the health sector.
    [Show full text]
  • Registration of Rectal Cancer-Related Clinical Trials on Chinese Clinical Trial Registry Over Past Decades
    Registration of Rectal Cancer-Related Clinical Trials on Chinese Clinical Trial Registry over past decades Jun-hong Hu ( [email protected] ) Henan University https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2590-6784 Shi-Can Zhou Henan University Quan Zhang Henan University Xing- Wang Li Henan University Chen-Yu Wang Henan University Jun-Jie Zhang Henan University Zheng Ge Henan University Research Keywords: Rectal cancer, Clinical trials, Chinese Clinical Trial Registry Posted Date: February 12th, 2020 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.2.23371/v1 License: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Read Full License Page 1/15 Abstract Background This study investigated and analyzed rectal cancer-related clinical trials registered on Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (Chi-CTR) by the end of 2018. We aimed to discuss the characteristics and developmental trends. Methods The Chi-CTR database was searched and all clinical trials related to rectal cancer extracted. The time limit for the search was from the establishment of the data library to December 31, 2018. The characteristics of registered clinical trials were then analyzed. Results A total of 70 clinical trials were retreived. Beijing, Shandong, and Guangzhou accounted for 47.1% of the total number of registered clinical trials. Sichuan and Sun Yat-sen Universities having the highest number of registrations. The registration status of the 55 trials was prospective registration. The top sources of funding were self-nancing (41.4%), hospital funding (22.9%) and local nance (15.7%). Out of the 43 randomized controlled trials, 39 were either blank or missing in the blinded section.
    [Show full text]
  • Main Principles of Evidence-Based Medicine
    Ministry of Public Health of Ukraine Zaporizhzhia State Medical University Department of Internal Diseases 1 S. M. Kyselov MAIN PRINCIPLES OF EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE TUTORIAL Zaporizhzhia 2020 UDC 616-07/-08(075.8) K 99 Tutorial is recommended for publication by Central Methodic Council of Zaporizhzhia State Medical University (protocol № 3 від 27 лютого 2020) Author: S.M. Kyselov, MD, PhD, DSc, professor of Department of Internal Diseases 1 of ZSMU Reviewers: S.Ya. Dotsenko, professor, MD, PhD, DSc, head of Department of Internal Diseases 3 of ZSMU; V.V. Syvolap, professor, MD, PhD, DSc, head of Department of Multimodal Diagnostics and Propedeutics of ZSMU. Kyselov S. M. K 99 Main principles of evidence-based medicine: tutorial / S.M. Kyselov. – Zaporizhzhia: ZSMU, 2020 – 105 p. In tutorial have been highlighted main issues and principles of evidence-based medicine, determined its role in modern clinical practice. It will be useful for students of medical high schools of III-IV accreditation levels. UDC 616-07/-08(075.8) © Kyselov S.M., 2020 © Zaporizhzhia State Medical University, 2020 2 Table of Content List of abbreviations ..………………………………………………………...……4 Introduction ..………………………………………………………………………5 Actuality …...………………………………………………………………………6 Origin of evidence-based medicine ….…………………………………………….7 Main principles of evidence-based medicine …...………………………………..12 Levels of evidence and grades of recommendations ……………………………..15 Key concepts of clinical epidemiology ..…………………………………………21 Epidemiological trials design.………..…………………………………………...35
    [Show full text]
  • Cohort Studies Or Prospective and Retrospective Cohort Studies
    www. jhgd.com.br ORIGINAL ARTICLE Research methodology topics: Cohort studies or prospective and retrospective cohort studies Luís Marcelo Aranha Camargo1,2,3,4,5, Romeu Paulo Martins Silva5,6, Dionatas Ulises de Oliveira Meneguetti5,7 Abstract Open acess 1Institute of Biomedical Sciences, In health sciences, the epidemiological method can be divided University of São Paulo, Monte into descriptive and analytical epidemiology and the latter being Negro, Rondônia, Brazil divided into observational (cross-sectional study, case-control 2Department of Medicine, São study and cohort study) and experimental studies. Cohort Lucas University Center, Porto studies may be retrospective or prospective, and both assume Velho, Rondônia, Brazil. that the researcher will follow a population over time to seek a possible association between exposure (s) and outcome(s). 3Center of Tropical Medicine of Rondônia, Porto Velho, These types of studies have as advantages the possibility Rondônia, Brazil. of measuring several exposure factors and outcomes, both primary and secondary, for both relatively frequent outcomes 4 National Institute of Science and and rare exposure factors. However, they are often long and Technology EpiAmo / Rondônia. therefore expensive studies. They have as main biases those 5Stricto Sensu Graduate Program of selection, memory and information. These are studies that in Health Science in the Western may point to statistical associations between exposure and Amazon, Federal University of Acre, Rio Branco, Acre, Brazil. outcome that need other models to prove the casualty of these associations. 6Center for Health and Sports Sciences, Federal University of Acre, Rio Branco, Acre, Brazil. Keywords: cohort, longitudinal study, follow-up. 7School of Application, Federal University of Acre, Rio Branco, Acre, Brazil.
    [Show full text]
  • Epidemiological Approaches to Heart Disease: the Framingham Study* THOMAS R
    Vol. 41 Epidemiological Approaches to Heart Disease: The Framingham Study* THOMAS R. DAWBER, M.D., GILCIN F. MEADORS, M.D., M.P.H., AND FELIX E. MOORE, JR. National Heart Institute, National Institutes of Health, Public Health Service, Federal Security Agency, Washington, D. C. THE use of the word " epidemiology " cal diagnosis. Thus, today, the epidemi- and the concept of what epidemi- ological approach is used to explore ology as a discipline may encompass has certain relationships in health and disease varied widely since the days of Peter which, with present technological meth- Panum and John Snow. There are today ods, cannot be observed directly. In many differing definitions of the word, addition to the many studies of the infec- but nearly all workers in the field will tious diseases, there have been epi- agree on one element of the definition: demiological studies in the fields of The word " epidemiology " by etymology nutritional imbalance, metabolic dis- refers to the study of something " which orders, occupational hazards, accidents, is thrust upon the people." There are cancer, and rheumatic fever-to mention still some who insist that epidemiology only a few. deals only with epidemics of infectious In the field of cardiovascular diseases, diseases, but current usage suggests that studies using the epidemiological method most workers would now agree that epi- have led to findings of considerable prac- demiology deals with " the fundamental tical importance for prevention and questions as to where a given disease is treatment. Mention may be made, for found, when it thrives, where and when example, of the studies of nutritional it is not found .
    [Show full text]
  • Epidemiology: the Foundation of Public Health
    Detels - Page 1 Epidemiology: the foundation of public health Roger Detels, M.D., M.S. Abstract Epidemiology is the basic science of public health, because it is the science that describes the relationship of health or disease with other health-related factors in human populations, such as human pathogens. Furthermore, epidemiology has been used to generate much of the information required by public health professionals to develop, implement, and evaluate effective intervention programmes for prevention of disease and promotion of health, such as the eradication of smallpox, the anticipated eradication of polio and guinea worm disease, and prevention of heart disease and cancer. Unlike pathology, which constitutes a basic area of knowledge, and cardiology, which is the study of a specific organ, epidemiology is a philosophy and methodology that can be applied to learning about and resolving a very broad range of health problems. The “art” of epidemiology is knowing when and how to apply the various epidemiological strategies creatively to answer specific health questions; it is not enough to know what the various study designs and statistical methodologies are. The uses and limitations of the various epidemiological study designs are presented to illustrate and underscore the fact that the successful application of epidemiology requires more than a knowledge of study designs and epidemiological methods. These designs and methods must be applied appropriately, creatively, and innovatively if they are to yield the desired information. The field of epidemiology has been expanding dramatically over the last three decades, as epidemiologists have demonstrated new Detels - Page 2 uses and variations of traditional study designs and methods.
    [Show full text]