This document discusses different levels of analysis and inference in ecological studies. It defines ecological studies as those that analyze populations or groups rather than individuals. There are different levels of measurement in ecological studies including aggregate measures that summarize individual characteristics within groups, environmental measures of physical characteristics, and global measures that have no individual analog. The levels of analysis in ecological studies include individual-level, completely ecological, partially ecological, and multi-level analysis. Levels of inference can be made at the biological/individual level or ecological level about group rates, but cross-level inferences from ecological to individual levels are vulnerable to bias.
Ecological study designs provide a way to study the effects of environmental exposures on health outcomes when it is difficult to obtain individual-level exposure data. Ecological studies observe associations between disease rates and exposure levels among groups rather than individuals. They can generate hypotheses about disease etiology and evaluate the impact of interventions. However, ecological studies have limitations as they do not measure exposures or health outcomes at the individual level.
This document discusses assessing risk of bias during systematic reviews. It defines bias as systematic error that deviates from the truth and can lead to over or underestimating effects. Assessing bias in included studies is important because results may be consistent due to flaws. There are seven domains for assessing bias: selection, performance, detection, attrition, reporting, and other biases. Risk of bias is assessed by reviewing study methods, looking for missing information, and making judgments on pre-specified criteria about the likelihood studies were affected by bias in each domain. Tools like risk of bias tables are used to categorize judgments of low, high, or unclear risk of bias in individual studies.
This document discusses measures of association used to quantify the relationship between an exposure and outcome in epidemiological studies. There are two types of measures: absolute measures, which are based on differences in disease frequency between exposed and unexposed groups, and relative measures, which are ratios of disease frequency. Common measures include risk difference, risk ratio, and odds ratio. Measures are calculated using data organized in 2x2 tables and can be interpreted as showing the strength and direction of association.
These annotated slides will help you interpret an OR or RR in clinical terms. Please download these slides and view them in PowerPoint so you can view the annotations describing each slide.
This document discusses cross-sectional studies, which measure exposure and health outcomes at the same point in time. It notes that cross-sectional studies can be descriptive, providing prevalence rates, or analytic, examining associations between exposures and outcomes. While able to generate hypotheses, cross-sectional studies cannot determine causation due to their inability to assess temporal relationships. The document also briefly touches on case reports and case series, which lack control groups for formally assessing relationships.
This document outlines different types of epidemiologic study designs, including descriptive studies like case reports, case series, and cross-sectional studies which collect data to describe disease occurrence but cannot determine causality. Analytical studies like case-control and cohort studies seek to identify associations between exposures and outcomes. Experimental studies use deliberate interventions to establish causality. Each design has strengths and limitations related to bias, ability to determine causality, required resources, and generalizability.
The document discusses odds ratios, which are used to measure the association between an exposure and an outcome. An odds ratio is calculated by dividing the odds of an event in one group (e.g. exposed to a drug) by the odds of the event in another unexposed group. Odds ratios can be calculated in both cohort and case-control studies. While relative risk can only be calculated in cohort studies, odds ratios are commonly used to approximate relative risk in case-control studies when the outcome is rare. The document provides examples of how to calculate odds ratios from 2x2 contingency tables and interprets what different values mean.
This document contains 26 slides presented by Dr. Rizwan S A on cohort studies. It defines cohort studies as prospective longitudinal studies that follow healthy populations over time to determine the causes of diseases. Key aspects covered include classifying cohort studies as prospective, retrospective or combined; describing the elements of cohort studies such as selecting and following subjects, measuring exposure and outcomes, and analyzing results using measures like relative risk, risk difference and attributable risk. Examples of famous cohort studies on smoking, heart disease and oral contraceptives are also provided.
Ecological study designs provide a way to study the effects of environmental exposures on health outcomes when it is difficult to obtain individual-level exposure data. Ecological studies observe associations between disease rates and exposure levels among groups rather than individuals. They can generate hypotheses about disease etiology and evaluate the impact of interventions. However, ecological studies have limitations as they do not measure exposures or health outcomes at the individual level.
This document discusses assessing risk of bias during systematic reviews. It defines bias as systematic error that deviates from the truth and can lead to over or underestimating effects. Assessing bias in included studies is important because results may be consistent due to flaws. There are seven domains for assessing bias: selection, performance, detection, attrition, reporting, and other biases. Risk of bias is assessed by reviewing study methods, looking for missing information, and making judgments on pre-specified criteria about the likelihood studies were affected by bias in each domain. Tools like risk of bias tables are used to categorize judgments of low, high, or unclear risk of bias in individual studies.
This document discusses measures of association used to quantify the relationship between an exposure and outcome in epidemiological studies. There are two types of measures: absolute measures, which are based on differences in disease frequency between exposed and unexposed groups, and relative measures, which are ratios of disease frequency. Common measures include risk difference, risk ratio, and odds ratio. Measures are calculated using data organized in 2x2 tables and can be interpreted as showing the strength and direction of association.
These annotated slides will help you interpret an OR or RR in clinical terms. Please download these slides and view them in PowerPoint so you can view the annotations describing each slide.
This document discusses cross-sectional studies, which measure exposure and health outcomes at the same point in time. It notes that cross-sectional studies can be descriptive, providing prevalence rates, or analytic, examining associations between exposures and outcomes. While able to generate hypotheses, cross-sectional studies cannot determine causation due to their inability to assess temporal relationships. The document also briefly touches on case reports and case series, which lack control groups for formally assessing relationships.
This document outlines different types of epidemiologic study designs, including descriptive studies like case reports, case series, and cross-sectional studies which collect data to describe disease occurrence but cannot determine causality. Analytical studies like case-control and cohort studies seek to identify associations between exposures and outcomes. Experimental studies use deliberate interventions to establish causality. Each design has strengths and limitations related to bias, ability to determine causality, required resources, and generalizability.
The document discusses odds ratios, which are used to measure the association between an exposure and an outcome. An odds ratio is calculated by dividing the odds of an event in one group (e.g. exposed to a drug) by the odds of the event in another unexposed group. Odds ratios can be calculated in both cohort and case-control studies. While relative risk can only be calculated in cohort studies, odds ratios are commonly used to approximate relative risk in case-control studies when the outcome is rare. The document provides examples of how to calculate odds ratios from 2x2 contingency tables and interprets what different values mean.
This document contains 26 slides presented by Dr. Rizwan S A on cohort studies. It defines cohort studies as prospective longitudinal studies that follow healthy populations over time to determine the causes of diseases. Key aspects covered include classifying cohort studies as prospective, retrospective or combined; describing the elements of cohort studies such as selecting and following subjects, measuring exposure and outcomes, and analyzing results using measures like relative risk, risk difference and attributable risk. Examples of famous cohort studies on smoking, heart disease and oral contraceptives are also provided.
This document provides an outline and overview of key concepts in case-control study design and analysis. It discusses topics such as measures of disease occurrence, relative risk, sample size calculation, methods for adjusting for confounding, and multivariate analysis techniques including logistic regression and log-linear models. The goal is to introduce the basic methodology for case-control studies and analyzing associations between disease outcomes and exposures of interest.
The STUDY of the DISTRIBUTION and DETERMINANTS of HEALTH-RELATED STATES in specified POPULATIONS, and the application of this study to CONTROL of health problems."
Here are the key points to compare the different research methods:
Cross-sectional study:
- Advantages: Quick, easy, low cost, can study multiple factors at once
- Disadvantages: Cannot determine temporal sequence, prone to biases
- Requirements: Representative sample, standardized data collection
Case-control study:
- Advantages: Efficient to study rare diseases, can study multiple exposures
- Disadvantages: Prone to selection and recall biases, uncertain temporal sequence
- Requirements: Clear case definition, appropriate controls matched to cases
Cohort study:
- Advantages: Directly measures risk, establishes temporal sequence
- Disadvantages: Expensive, long follow up needed
This document discusses bias and confounding in epidemiological studies. It defines bias as systematic error that results in incorrect estimation of exposure-outcome associations. Selection bias and information bias are two common types of bias. Confounding occurs when another exposure is associated with both the disease and exposure being studied, independently of the exposure-disease relationship. Methods to control for confounding include restriction, matching, randomization, stratification, and multivariate analysis at the design and analysis stages of a study.
Lecture of Respected Sir Dr. L.M. BEHERA from N.I.H. KOLKATA in a workshop at G.D.M.H.M.C. - Patna in the Year 2011.
SUBJECT : BIOSTATISTICS
TOPIC : 'INTRODUCTION TO BIOSTATISTICS'.
The document discusses the concept of confounding in epidemiological studies. There are three key points:
1) Confounding occurs when a third variable influences both the exposure and outcome, creating a spurious association between the two. Smoking is a confounding variable for the relationship between coffee drinking and pancreatic cancer risk.
2) There are three criteria for confounding: the factor must be associated with both the exposure and outcome, be unevenly distributed among exposure groups, and not be on the causal pathway between exposure and outcome.
3) Methods to control for confounding include matching, stratification, randomization, statistical adjustment like regression, and ensuring a large effect size overwhelms confounding. Confound
The document provides information on various study designs used in epidemiology, including descriptive and analytical studies. Descriptive studies like case reports and case series are used to identify frequencies, distributions and generate hypotheses. Analytical observational studies include cross-sectional, cohort and case-control studies used to test hypotheses. Cohort studies specifically follow groups over time to study exposure-disease relationships. They involve selecting exposed and non-exposed groups, defining and measuring exposures, following up to assess outcomes, and analyzing results including relative risk calculations.
The document discusses randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which are considered the gold standard for evaluating causal relationships. It describes key aspects of RCTs such as randomization methods, blinding, allocation concealment, study populations, interventions, follow-up, and outcome assessment. RCTs follow a strict protocol and involve randomly allocating participants into study and control groups to receive different interventions/exposures. The results are then compared to determine the effectiveness of the new treatment or exposure being tested.
This document discusses various epidemiological study designs. It begins by defining descriptive studies, which involve systematically collecting and presenting data to describe a situation, and analytical studies, which attempt to establish causes or risk factors by comparing exposed and unexposed groups. The main types of descriptive studies covered are cross-sectional (examining a population at a single point in time), longitudinal (following a population over time), and ecological (examining population-level associations between exposures and outcomes). Advantages and disadvantages of each design are provided.
This study aims to prevent childhood obesity through early childhood feeding and parenting guidance. It will randomize pregnant women into an intervention and control group. The intervention group will receive home visits and guidance from community health workers, while the control group will only receive measurements. The study hypothesizes that fewer children in the intervention group will be overweight or obese due to differences in feeding practices and responsiveness to infant cues. Data on infant growth, diet, sleep and more will be collected to assess the effectiveness of the early intervention program in preventing childhood obesity.
This document summarizes a seminar presentation on case control studies. It begins by defining epidemiological study cycles and analytical study types such as case control and cohort studies. It then focuses on case control studies, defining them, discussing their history, design, outcomes, limitations, advantages and applications. Examples of notable case control studies are provided, such as Lane Claypon's 1926 breast cancer study and studies from the 1950s linking smoking to lung cancer. Key aspects of case control study methodology like selection of cases and controls, and matching to control for confounding variables are explained.
This document discusses factors to consider when determining sample size for statistical studies. It notes that sample size is usually based on the study's objective and should be stated in the study protocol. Key factors in determining sample size include estimates of population standard deviation, acceptable sampling error levels, and desired confidence levels. Several methods are described for calculating sample size, including traditional statistical models and Bayesian models. The document also discusses concepts like sampling distributions of means and proportions, and factors that affect sample size calculations for estimating proportions, such as specifying acceptable error levels, confidence levels, and population proportion estimates.
This document discusses different types of epidemiologic study designs including descriptive studies, analytical studies, and experimental studies. It provides details on descriptive epidemiology, analytic epidemiology, and different types of observational and experimental study designs such as cohort studies, case-control studies, randomized controlled trials, and ecological studies. Key aspects of cohort and case-control study designs are outlined including their advantages and disadvantages. Potential sources of error and bias in epidemiologic studies are also reviewed.
This document describes a cross-sectional study and its methodology. A cross-sectional study involves collecting data on exposure and outcome variables from a population at a single point in time. The document discusses the differences between descriptive and analytical cross-sectional studies. Descriptive studies measure prevalence, while analytical studies test associations between exposures and outcomes. The document provides examples of cross-sectional study design, biases, advantages, and guidelines for evaluating validity.
This document provides an overview of cohort studies. It defines a cohort study as observing a group of people who share a common characteristic or experience over time to study the frequency of disease. The key features discussed include: identifying cohorts prior to disease, observing cohorts prospectively to study cause-effect relationships, minimizing attrition, and comparing exposed and non-exposed groups. The document also covers types of cohort studies, elements of cohort studies like follow-up, and strengths such as establishing causation but also weaknesses like loss to follow-up.
The document provides information about the Chi Square test, including:
- It is one of the most widely used statistical tests in research.
- It compares observed frequencies to expected frequencies to test hypotheses about categorical variables.
- The key steps are defining hypotheses, calculating the test statistic, determining the degrees of freedom, finding the critical value, and making a conclusion by comparing the test statistic to the critical value.
- It can be used for goodness of fit tests, tests of homogeneity of proportions, and tests of independence between categorical variables. Examples of applications in cohort studies, case-control studies, and matched case-control studies are provided.
This document discusses case control studies and provides examples to illustrate their use. It defines a case control study as an epidemiological approach that starts with identified "cases" who have a disease and compares them to "controls" who do not have the disease. The study then examines past exposure history to identify potential risk factors.
Key aspects of case control studies covered include selecting appropriate cases and controls, matching on important variables, measuring past exposure, calculating odds ratios to estimate disease risk associated with exposures, and potential biases like selection bias, recall bias, and survivorship bias. Examples are provided of early case control studies that helped identify links between smoking and lung cancer, and between rubella infection and cataracts.
ODDS RATIO AND RELATIVE RISK EVALUATIONKanhu Charan
Relative risk and odds ratio are measures used to quantify the strength of association between an exposure and an outcome. Relative risk is calculated as the incidence of an outcome in an exposed group divided by the incidence in an unexposed group. It is the preferred measure for cohort studies where the number of people at risk is known. Odds ratio is calculated as the odds of exposure in those with the outcome divided by the odds of exposure in those without the outcome. It is used for case-control studies where the total number exposed is not known. Both measures can help determine if a risk factor increases, decreases, or has no effect on the risk of an outcome. The key difference is that relative risk utilizes probabilities while odds ratio uses odds.
This document discusses ecological studies, which investigate the distribution of health outcomes and their determinants between groups rather than individuals. While individual-level data may not be available, ecological studies can still provide useful information. However, inferences made from ecological data to individuals may be biased due to factors varying between groups like background rates, confounding, or effect modification. Conditions where ecological bias does not occur include no variation in background rates or effects between groups. Solutions proposed to address ecological bias include obtaining more detailed covariate data or conducting individual-level studies. The document provides examples of potential biases and compares individual versus ecological estimates using a study of radon exposure and lung cancer risk.
Ecological study design multiple group study and statistical analysissirjana Tiwari
This document summarizes study designs used in ecological studies. It discusses multiple group study designs which examine exposure and disease rates across population groups defined by place. It describes variables measured at the group level like aggregate measures, environmental measures, and global measures. It also discusses exploratory versus analytical ecological study designs and examples of statistical analyses used like regression modeling, empirical Bayes methods, and assessing spatial autocorrelation.
This document provides an outline and overview of key concepts in case-control study design and analysis. It discusses topics such as measures of disease occurrence, relative risk, sample size calculation, methods for adjusting for confounding, and multivariate analysis techniques including logistic regression and log-linear models. The goal is to introduce the basic methodology for case-control studies and analyzing associations between disease outcomes and exposures of interest.
The STUDY of the DISTRIBUTION and DETERMINANTS of HEALTH-RELATED STATES in specified POPULATIONS, and the application of this study to CONTROL of health problems."
Here are the key points to compare the different research methods:
Cross-sectional study:
- Advantages: Quick, easy, low cost, can study multiple factors at once
- Disadvantages: Cannot determine temporal sequence, prone to biases
- Requirements: Representative sample, standardized data collection
Case-control study:
- Advantages: Efficient to study rare diseases, can study multiple exposures
- Disadvantages: Prone to selection and recall biases, uncertain temporal sequence
- Requirements: Clear case definition, appropriate controls matched to cases
Cohort study:
- Advantages: Directly measures risk, establishes temporal sequence
- Disadvantages: Expensive, long follow up needed
This document discusses bias and confounding in epidemiological studies. It defines bias as systematic error that results in incorrect estimation of exposure-outcome associations. Selection bias and information bias are two common types of bias. Confounding occurs when another exposure is associated with both the disease and exposure being studied, independently of the exposure-disease relationship. Methods to control for confounding include restriction, matching, randomization, stratification, and multivariate analysis at the design and analysis stages of a study.
Lecture of Respected Sir Dr. L.M. BEHERA from N.I.H. KOLKATA in a workshop at G.D.M.H.M.C. - Patna in the Year 2011.
SUBJECT : BIOSTATISTICS
TOPIC : 'INTRODUCTION TO BIOSTATISTICS'.
The document discusses the concept of confounding in epidemiological studies. There are three key points:
1) Confounding occurs when a third variable influences both the exposure and outcome, creating a spurious association between the two. Smoking is a confounding variable for the relationship between coffee drinking and pancreatic cancer risk.
2) There are three criteria for confounding: the factor must be associated with both the exposure and outcome, be unevenly distributed among exposure groups, and not be on the causal pathway between exposure and outcome.
3) Methods to control for confounding include matching, stratification, randomization, statistical adjustment like regression, and ensuring a large effect size overwhelms confounding. Confound
The document provides information on various study designs used in epidemiology, including descriptive and analytical studies. Descriptive studies like case reports and case series are used to identify frequencies, distributions and generate hypotheses. Analytical observational studies include cross-sectional, cohort and case-control studies used to test hypotheses. Cohort studies specifically follow groups over time to study exposure-disease relationships. They involve selecting exposed and non-exposed groups, defining and measuring exposures, following up to assess outcomes, and analyzing results including relative risk calculations.
The document discusses randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which are considered the gold standard for evaluating causal relationships. It describes key aspects of RCTs such as randomization methods, blinding, allocation concealment, study populations, interventions, follow-up, and outcome assessment. RCTs follow a strict protocol and involve randomly allocating participants into study and control groups to receive different interventions/exposures. The results are then compared to determine the effectiveness of the new treatment or exposure being tested.
This document discusses various epidemiological study designs. It begins by defining descriptive studies, which involve systematically collecting and presenting data to describe a situation, and analytical studies, which attempt to establish causes or risk factors by comparing exposed and unexposed groups. The main types of descriptive studies covered are cross-sectional (examining a population at a single point in time), longitudinal (following a population over time), and ecological (examining population-level associations between exposures and outcomes). Advantages and disadvantages of each design are provided.
This study aims to prevent childhood obesity through early childhood feeding and parenting guidance. It will randomize pregnant women into an intervention and control group. The intervention group will receive home visits and guidance from community health workers, while the control group will only receive measurements. The study hypothesizes that fewer children in the intervention group will be overweight or obese due to differences in feeding practices and responsiveness to infant cues. Data on infant growth, diet, sleep and more will be collected to assess the effectiveness of the early intervention program in preventing childhood obesity.
This document summarizes a seminar presentation on case control studies. It begins by defining epidemiological study cycles and analytical study types such as case control and cohort studies. It then focuses on case control studies, defining them, discussing their history, design, outcomes, limitations, advantages and applications. Examples of notable case control studies are provided, such as Lane Claypon's 1926 breast cancer study and studies from the 1950s linking smoking to lung cancer. Key aspects of case control study methodology like selection of cases and controls, and matching to control for confounding variables are explained.
This document discusses factors to consider when determining sample size for statistical studies. It notes that sample size is usually based on the study's objective and should be stated in the study protocol. Key factors in determining sample size include estimates of population standard deviation, acceptable sampling error levels, and desired confidence levels. Several methods are described for calculating sample size, including traditional statistical models and Bayesian models. The document also discusses concepts like sampling distributions of means and proportions, and factors that affect sample size calculations for estimating proportions, such as specifying acceptable error levels, confidence levels, and population proportion estimates.
This document discusses different types of epidemiologic study designs including descriptive studies, analytical studies, and experimental studies. It provides details on descriptive epidemiology, analytic epidemiology, and different types of observational and experimental study designs such as cohort studies, case-control studies, randomized controlled trials, and ecological studies. Key aspects of cohort and case-control study designs are outlined including their advantages and disadvantages. Potential sources of error and bias in epidemiologic studies are also reviewed.
This document describes a cross-sectional study and its methodology. A cross-sectional study involves collecting data on exposure and outcome variables from a population at a single point in time. The document discusses the differences between descriptive and analytical cross-sectional studies. Descriptive studies measure prevalence, while analytical studies test associations between exposures and outcomes. The document provides examples of cross-sectional study design, biases, advantages, and guidelines for evaluating validity.
This document provides an overview of cohort studies. It defines a cohort study as observing a group of people who share a common characteristic or experience over time to study the frequency of disease. The key features discussed include: identifying cohorts prior to disease, observing cohorts prospectively to study cause-effect relationships, minimizing attrition, and comparing exposed and non-exposed groups. The document also covers types of cohort studies, elements of cohort studies like follow-up, and strengths such as establishing causation but also weaknesses like loss to follow-up.
The document provides information about the Chi Square test, including:
- It is one of the most widely used statistical tests in research.
- It compares observed frequencies to expected frequencies to test hypotheses about categorical variables.
- The key steps are defining hypotheses, calculating the test statistic, determining the degrees of freedom, finding the critical value, and making a conclusion by comparing the test statistic to the critical value.
- It can be used for goodness of fit tests, tests of homogeneity of proportions, and tests of independence between categorical variables. Examples of applications in cohort studies, case-control studies, and matched case-control studies are provided.
This document discusses case control studies and provides examples to illustrate their use. It defines a case control study as an epidemiological approach that starts with identified "cases" who have a disease and compares them to "controls" who do not have the disease. The study then examines past exposure history to identify potential risk factors.
Key aspects of case control studies covered include selecting appropriate cases and controls, matching on important variables, measuring past exposure, calculating odds ratios to estimate disease risk associated with exposures, and potential biases like selection bias, recall bias, and survivorship bias. Examples are provided of early case control studies that helped identify links between smoking and lung cancer, and between rubella infection and cataracts.
ODDS RATIO AND RELATIVE RISK EVALUATIONKanhu Charan
Relative risk and odds ratio are measures used to quantify the strength of association between an exposure and an outcome. Relative risk is calculated as the incidence of an outcome in an exposed group divided by the incidence in an unexposed group. It is the preferred measure for cohort studies where the number of people at risk is known. Odds ratio is calculated as the odds of exposure in those with the outcome divided by the odds of exposure in those without the outcome. It is used for case-control studies where the total number exposed is not known. Both measures can help determine if a risk factor increases, decreases, or has no effect on the risk of an outcome. The key difference is that relative risk utilizes probabilities while odds ratio uses odds.
This document discusses ecological studies, which investigate the distribution of health outcomes and their determinants between groups rather than individuals. While individual-level data may not be available, ecological studies can still provide useful information. However, inferences made from ecological data to individuals may be biased due to factors varying between groups like background rates, confounding, or effect modification. Conditions where ecological bias does not occur include no variation in background rates or effects between groups. Solutions proposed to address ecological bias include obtaining more detailed covariate data or conducting individual-level studies. The document provides examples of potential biases and compares individual versus ecological estimates using a study of radon exposure and lung cancer risk.
Ecological study design multiple group study and statistical analysissirjana Tiwari
This document summarizes study designs used in ecological studies. It discusses multiple group study designs which examine exposure and disease rates across population groups defined by place. It describes variables measured at the group level like aggregate measures, environmental measures, and global measures. It also discusses exploratory versus analytical ecological study designs and examples of statistical analyses used like regression modeling, empirical Bayes methods, and assessing spatial autocorrelation.
Ecological studies examine the relationship between risk factors and health outcomes across groups or populations rather than individuals. They use aggregate or group-level data that is often already collected. While easy and inexpensive to conduct, ecological studies are prone to bias and ecological fallacy since associations found at the group level may not apply to individuals. They are best used for initial exploratory analyses to generate hypotheses for further research with stronger study designs.
This document provides an overview of epidemiology and methods for analyzing epidemiological data. It discusses the aims of epidemiology, including finding associations between risk factors and diseases. It describes different types of epidemiological studies like cohort studies and case-control studies. It also covers measures of disease frequency and effect, statistical analysis methods including odds ratios, logistic regression, and sources of bias in epidemiological studies.
This document provides an overview of case-control study designs in epidemiology. It defines a case-control study as one that selects participants based on disease status, including cases who have the disease and controls who do not. Exposure is then assessed retrospectively. Key strengths are efficiency and ability to study rare diseases, while weaknesses include vulnerability to selection bias and inability to directly estimate incidence. Measures of association from case-control data estimate incidence odds ratios when cases are incident. Recall bias can also influence odds ratio estimates if differential between cases and controls.
This document provides an introduction to air pollution epidemiology. It discusses key concepts in epidemiology such as distribution, determinants, and populations. It also covers study designs used in air pollution epidemiology including time-series studies, case-crossover studies, ecological studies, cross-sectional studies, case-control studies, and cohort studies. Examples of each type of study assessing the relationship between air pollution and health outcomes are also provided.
Epidemiology is the study of health outcomes in populations. Air pollution epidemiology focuses specifically on air pollution as a risk factor for health effects. Key study designs include time-series analyses for short-term exposures and cohort studies for long-term exposures. Cohort studies are considered the gold standard as they can establish temporality between exposure and outcome. Epidemiological findings have influenced air quality standards and policies by demonstrating adverse health effects even below existing limits.
This document discusses various study designs used in epidemiology, including measures of disease occurrence such as prevalence and incidence. It defines prevalence as the total number of cases of a disease at a specified time, while incidence refers to the number of new cases that occur over a period of time. Cohort studies are described as following groups over time to compare rates of an outcome between those exposed and unexposed to a factor. Case-control studies select groups based on having or not having an outcome and look back to compare exposures. Biases such as selection, information and confounding are also outlined.
Risk factors in Multiple Sclerosis: Detection and Treatment in Daily Life
Caroline Pot and Patrice Lalive
Unit of Neuroimmunology and Multi Sclerosis Geneva University Hospital
This document describes different types of descriptive epidemiological study designs including ecological, case reports/series, and cross-sectional studies. It explains that descriptive studies generate hypotheses about associations but do not establish causation. A cross-sectional study example looks at trachoma prevalence between groups with poor and good hygiene. The prevalence of trachoma is higher among those with poor hygiene (13.8%) compared to good hygiene (3.3%), with a prevalence ratio of 4.2, suggesting trachoma may be associated with poor hygiene.
This document provides an overview of descriptive epidemiological study designs including ecological, case reports/series, cross-sectional studies. It defines key terms like prevalence, analyzes examples, and discusses the strengths and limitations of each design. Specifically, it examines a cross-sectional study example looking at the prevalence of trachoma associated with poor hygiene. The prevalence of trachoma in the population of 1900 is found to be 796/1900 = 41.8% while the prevalence ratio of trachoma among those with poor hygiene (54/391 = 13.8%) versus good hygiene (50/1509 = 3.3%) is 4.2, indicating trachoma is associated with poor hygiene.
Green Space Quantity and Mental Health: Evidence on Gender Differences in Rel...Dr Lynette Robertson
Presentation on research undertaken for the OPENspace component of the Scottish 'GreenHealth' research programme, presented at the 14th International Conference on Urban Health (IUCH), Coimbra, Portugal (26-29th Sept 2017) and Valuing Nature 2017, Edinburgh
Environmental Pollutants and Disease in American: Children: Estimates of Morbidity, Mortality, and Costs for Lead Poisoning, Asthma, Cancer, and Developmental Disabilities
This document discusses quantitative and qualitative research methods used in medical research. It provides examples of quantitative research designs including observational studies like cross-sectional, case-control and cohort studies as well as experimental designs like randomized controlled trials. Key aspects of cohort studies are described such as their distinguishing features, examples of different types, and measures used to determine risk like relative risk and attributable risk.
This document discusses various epidemiologic study designs including descriptive and analytic designs. Descriptive designs like case studies, cross-sectional studies, and ecological studies focus on assessing samples without making causal inferences, while analytic designs like cohort studies, case-control studies, and experimental studies utilize comparisons to evaluate relationships between exposures and outcomes. Meta-analysis involves statistically combining results from multiple separate but related studies to obtain an overall effect or relationship.
This document discusses various epidemiologic study designs including descriptive and analytic designs. Descriptive designs focus on assessing samples without causal inferences, and include case studies, cross-sectional studies, and ecological studies. Analytic designs utilize comparison groups and include experimental, cohort, and case-control studies. The strengths and weaknesses of each design are described.
This document discusses various epidemiologic study designs including descriptive and analytic designs. Descriptive designs like case studies, cross-sectional studies, and ecological studies focus on assessing samples without making causal inferences, while analytic designs like cohort studies, case-control studies, and experimental studies utilize comparisons to evaluate relationships between exposures and outcomes. Meta-analysis involves statistically combining results from multiple separate but related studies to obtain an overall conclusion.
Weon preconference pearce variation and causationBsie
The document discusses the differences between the analysis of variance and the analysis of causes. It notes that the analysis of variance focuses on explaining variation in outcomes, while the analysis of causes aims to determine the effects of exposures on outcomes. Measures like percentage of variance explained and correlation coefficients are dependent on exposure variation and not suitable for causal inference. Population comparisons continue to be important for generating hypotheses, as some exposures only vary between populations. Randomized trials are not always the most appropriate framework for epidemiology.
A presentation made at the 2015 NC BREATHE Conference by Jason West, PhD of University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill. Sponsored by Clean Air Carolina and partners, the 2015 NC BREATHE Conference was held on March 27, 2015 in Raleigh, NC to bring together air quality researchers, medical and public health professionals, and policymakers to share the latest research on the health impacts of air pollution, the positive health outcomes related to clean air policy-making, and the resulting economic benefits.
This document defines epidemiology and describes its aims and methods. Epidemiology is defined as the study of the distribution and determinants of health-related states in populations and the application of this study to control health problems. The main aims of epidemiology are to describe population health status, explain disease etiology, predict disease occurrence, control disease distribution, and promote health. Descriptive epidemiology involves describing diseases in terms of time, place, and person, while analytical epidemiology aims to determine causal factors through observational studies like cohort and case-control studies.
Similar to Levels of analysis and levels of inference in ecological study (20)
Michigan HealthTech Market Map 2024. Includes 7 categories: Policy Makers, Academic Innovation Centers, Digital Health Providers, Healthcare Providers, Payers / Insurance, Device Companies, Life Science Companies, Innovation Accelerators. Developed by the Michigan-Israel Business Accelerator
PET CT beginners Guide covers some of the underrepresented topics in PET CTMiadAlsulami
This lecture briefly covers some of the underrepresented topics in Molecular imaging with cases , such as:
- Primary pleural tumors and pleural metastases.
- Distinguishing between MPM and Talc Pleurodesis.
- Urological tumors.
- The role of FDG PET in NET.
We are one of the top Massage Spa Ajman Our highly skilled, experienced, and certified massage therapists from different corners of the world are committed to serving you with a soothing and relaxing experience. Luxuriate yourself at our spas in Sharjah and Ajman, which are indeed enriched with an ambiance of relaxation and tranquility. We could confidently claim that we are one of the most affordable Spa Ajman and Sharjah as well, where you can book the massage session of your choice for just 99 AED at any time as we are open 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
Visit : https://massagespaajman.com/
Call : 052 987 1315
2024 HIPAA Compliance Training Guide to the Compliance OfficersConference Panel
Join us for a comprehensive 90-minute lesson designed specifically for Compliance Officers and Practice/Business Managers. This 2024 HIPAA Training session will guide you through the critical steps needed to ensure your practice is fully prepared for upcoming audits. Key updates and significant changes under the Omnibus Rule will be covered, along with the latest applicable updates for 2024.
Key Areas Covered:
Texting and Email Communication: Understand the compliance requirements for electronic communication.
Encryption Standards: Learn what is necessary and what is overhyped.
Medical Messaging and Voice Data: Ensure secure handling of sensitive information.
IT Risk Factors: Identify and mitigate risks related to your IT infrastructure.
Why Attend:
Expert Instructor: Brian Tuttle, with over 20 years in Health IT and Compliance Consulting, brings invaluable experience and knowledge, including insights from over 1000 risk assessments and direct dealings with Office of Civil Rights HIPAA auditors.
Actionable Insights: Receive practical advice on preparing for audits and avoiding common mistakes.
Clarity on Compliance: Clear up misconceptions and understand the reality of HIPAA regulations.
Ensure your compliance strategy is up-to-date and effective. Enroll now and be prepared for the 2024 HIPAA audits.
Enroll Now to secure your spot in this crucial training session and ensure your HIPAA compliance is robust and audit-ready.
https://conferencepanel.com/conference/hipaa-training-for-the-compliance-officer-2024-updates
The best massage spa Ajman is Chandrima Spa Ajman, which was founded in 2023 and is exclusively for men 24 hours a day. As of right now, our parent firm has been providing massage services to over 50,000+ clients in Ajman for the past 10 years. It has about 8+ branches. This demonstrates that Chandrima Spa Ajman is among the most reasonably priced spas in Ajman and the ideal place to unwind and rejuvenate. We provide a wide range of Spa massage treatments, including Indian, Pakistani, Kerala, Malayali, and body-to-body massages. Numerous massage techniques are available, including deep tissue, Swedish, Thai, Russian, and hot stone massages. Our massage therapists produce genuinely unique treatments that generate a revitalized sense of inner serenely by fusing modern techniques, the cleanest natural substances, and traditional holistic therapists.
Joker Wigs has been a one-stop-shop for hair products for over 26 years. We provide high-quality hair wigs, hair extensions, hair toppers, hair patch, and more for both men and women.
R3 Stem Cell Therapy: A New Hope for Women with Ovarian FailureR3 Stem Cell
Discover the groundbreaking advancements in stem cell therapy by R3 Stem Cell, offering new hope for women with ovarian failure. This innovative treatment aims to restore ovarian function, improve fertility, and enhance overall well-being, revolutionizing reproductive health for women worldwide.
At Apollo Hospital, Lucknow, U.P., we provide specialized care for children experiencing dehydration and other symptoms. We also offer NICU & PICU Ambulance Facility Services. Consult our expert today for the best pediatric emergency care.
For More Details:
Map: https://cutt.ly/BwCeflYo
Name: Apollo Hospital
Address: Singar Nagar, LDA Colony, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh 226012
Phone: 08429021957
Opening Hours: 24X7
This particular slides consist of- what is Pneumothorax,what are it's causes and it's effect on body, risk factors, symptoms,complications, diagnosis and role of physiotherapy in it.
This slide is very helpful for physiotherapy students and also for other medical and healthcare students.
Here is a summary of Pneumothorax:
Pneumothorax, also known as a collapsed lung, is a condition that occurs when air leaks into the space between the lung and chest wall. This air buildup puts pressure on the lung, preventing it from expanding fully when you breathe. A pneumothorax can cause a complete or partial collapse of the lung.
DECODING THE RISKS - ALCOHOL, TOBACCO & DRUGS.pdfDr Rachana Gujar
Introduction: Substance use education is crucial due to its prevalence and societal impact.
Alcohol Use: Immediate and long-term risks include impaired judgment, health issues, and social consequences.
Tobacco Use: Immediate effects include increased heart rate, while long-term risks encompass cancer and heart disease.
Drug Use: Risks vary depending on the drug type, including health and psychological implications.
Prevention Strategies: Education, healthy coping mechanisms, community support, and policies are vital in preventing substance use.
Harm Reduction Strategies: Safe use practices, medication-assisted treatment, and naloxone availability aim to reduce harm.
Seeking Help for Addiction: Recognizing signs, available treatments, support systems, and resources are essential for recovery.
Personal Stories: Real stories of recovery emphasize hope and resilience.
Interactive Q&A: Engage the audience and encourage discussion.
Conclusion: Recap key points and emphasize the importance of awareness, prevention, and seeking help.
Resources: Provide contact information and links for further support.
Gemma Wean- Nutritional solution for Artemiasmuskaan0008
GEMMA Wean is a high end larval co-feeding and weaning diet aimed at Artemia optimisation and is fortified with a high level of proteins and phospholipids. GEMMA Wean provides the early weaned juveniles with dedicated fish nutrition and is an ideal follow on from GEMMA Micro or Artemia.
GEMMA Wean has an optimised nutritional balance and physical quality so that it flows more freely and spreads readily on the water surface. The balance of phospholipid classes to- gether with the production technology based on a low temperature extrusion process improve the physical aspect of the pellets while still retaining the high phospholipid content.
GEMMA Wean is available in 0.1mm, 0.2mm and 0.3mm. There is also a 0.5mm micro-pellet, GEMMA Wean Diamond, which covers the early nursery stage from post-weaning to pre-growing.
The facial nerve, also known as cranial nerve VII, is one of the 12 cranial nerves originating from the brain. It's a mixed nerve, meaning it contains both sensory and motor fibres, and it plays a crucial role in controlling various facial muscles, as well as conveying sensory information from the taste buds on the anterior two-thirds of the tongue.
Common Challenges in Dermatology Billing and How to Overcome.pptx
Levels of analysis and levels of inference in ecological study
1. Presented by:
Kamal Bahadur Budha
Roll No: 11
MPH (HPE) 2017
School of Health and Allied Sciences
Faculty of Health Science
Pokhara University
1
2. Ecologic Studies
• “A study in which units of analysis are populations or
groups of people than individuals.” –[medical Dictionary, 2012]
• “An ecologic or aggregate study focuses on the
comparison of groups rather than individuals” –
Morgenstern, Modern Epi, 2008
• Units of observation are a population rather than
individual
– Country, region
– Group of population
• Mean values of hypothesized risk factor and outcome
are generated from each observation unit.
– Often plotted together to assess their relationship
2
3. Key issues with ecologic Studies
• Explores correlations between aggregate (group level)
exposure and outcomes
• Unit of analysis: usually not individual, but clusters
(e.g. countries, counties, schools)
• Useful for generating hypothesis
• Prone to “ecological fallacy”
• Cannot adjust well for confounding due to lack of
comparability (due to lack of data on all potential
covariates)
• Missing data is another concern
• Incomplete study(Kleinbaum et. al. 1982)
3
4. Levels of Measurement in Ecologic Studies
• Aggregate measures:
– Summarized the characteristics of individuals within a group as means or
proportions in groups, derived from individuals in each groups (e.g.
Prevalence of SHARC, Proportion of smoking, proportion of smokers and
Median family income)
• Environmental measures:
– Physical characteristics of the place in which members of each group works.
– Environmental measure has an analog at the individual level, but not easy to
measure
– E.g. air pollution level in a country or global
• Global measures:
– Attributes for groups or places for which there is not analog to individual
– E.g. population density, type of healthcare system, political system in the
country
4
5. Ecologic study of lung cancer risk factors in the US and
Japan, with special reference to smoking and diet
Example of Aggregate measures
characteristics of individuals
within a group as means or proportions in groups,
5
6. annual energy-related CO2 emissions /
population in different countries
5.13
16.9
1.37
10.8
8.6
9.2
7.3
15.4
0.12
6.66
16.22
1.56
10.2
9.35 8.93
7.12
16.61
0.21
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
China United states India Russian
federation
Japan Germany Islamic
republic of
Iran
Canada Nepal
CO2emissionsintonnes
tonnes CO 2 / capita
2009
2014
International Energy Agency (IEA) organization CO2 Emissions From Fuel Combustion
Example of Aggregate measures:
characteristics of individuals
within a group as means or proportions in groups,
6
7. Eg: Air pollution and case fatality of SARS in the
People's Republic of China: an ecologic study
Cui et al. Air pollution and case fatality of SARS in China
Example of Environmental measures
Physical characteristics of the place
Environmental measure characteristics of group
7
8. Mortality by inequality (Robin Hood index) in United States
(abbreviations are for each state).
Bruce P Kennedy et al. BMJ 1996;312:1004-1007
Example of Global measures:
Attributes for groups or places for which
there is not analog to individual
8
9. Levels of Analysis in Ecologic Studies
• Analysis is the process of breaking a complex topic or
substance into simple in order to gain a better
understanding of it.
Levels of Analysis deal with the
origin of that cause
•Individual
•Country/ national level
•International /systematic level
9
10. Levels of Analysis in Ecologic Studies
• The unit of analysis is the common level for which
the data on all variable are reduced and analyzed.
• Ecologic analysis can best be presented by dividing
ecologic study into
– Exploratory study (observe geographic differences in the
disease rate among several regions . For eg, For oral
cancers, one studies found a striking difference in
geographic patterns by sex: among men.)
– Multiple-group comparison study (ecologic association
by regressing Y on X)
– Time trend study (change in the average exposure level
and the change in the disease rate for a single
population)
– Mixed study (change in the average exposure level and
the change in the disease rate among several groups:
can calculate the RR, R, EF) Source: Morgenstern 198210
11. Levels of Analysis in Ecologic Studies
1. Individual-level analysis:
– Measurements are available for each individual in
the study
– Each variable is assigned to every subject in the
study
– Eg: average pollution level of each country might be
assigned to every subject
11
12. Levels of Analysis in Ecologic Studies
2. Completely ecologic analysis:
– All variables (exposure, outcome, covariates) are
ecologic measures, so unit of analysis is the
group(School, region, community)
– We do not know the joint distribution of variable
at individual level (frequency of exposed cases,
unexposed cases, exposed non case and
unexposed none cases)
– All we know the marginal distribution of each
variable. (proportion exposed and disease rate)
12
13. Levels of Analysis in Ecologic Studies
3. Partially ecologic analysis
– Information on certain joint distribution (M,N or
A/B frequency)
– but we still do not know the full joint distribution
of variables with in each group. (‘?’ cell are
messing)
– Eg.: ecological study of cancer incidence, joint
distribution of age and disease status then
estimation of age specific cancer rates.
– Outcome: cancer
– Covariate: Age
– Exposure: No 13
14. Joint distribution in each group of a simple ecological analysis
exposure status (X=1vs 0)
disease status (y = 1 vs 0)
Covariate status (z =1 vs 0)
T frequencies are the only data available in a completely ecological
analysis of all three variables,
M frequencies require additional data on the joint distribution of z and y
with each group.
N frequencies required additional data on the joint distribution of x and z
with each group,
A and B frequencies require additional data on the joint distribution of x
and y within each group,
? Cells are always missing ecological analysis
Z = 1
X = 1 X= 0
Y =1 ? ? M11
Y =0 ? ? M01
N11 N01 T0
Z = 0
X = 1 X= 0
? ? M10
? ? M00
N10 N00 T0
Total
X = 1 X= 0
A1+ A0+ T+1
B1+ B0+ T+1
T1+ T0+ T++
14
15. Levels of Analysis in Ecologic Studies
4. Multi-level analysis
– Combines data collected at two or more levels
– Contextual analysis
– Eg.: Individual level analysis might be conducted in
each group followed by ecological analysis of all
group using result from individual level
15
16. Ecologic study of lung cancer risk factors in the US and
Japan, with special reference to smoking and diet
Example of Completely ecologic
analysis
Additional information on certain joint distribution (M,N or A/B
frequency)
16
17. Annual energy-related CO2 emissions /
population in different countries
5.13
16.9
1.37
10.8
8.6
9.2
7.3
15.4
0.12
6.66
16.22
1.56
10.2
9.35 8.93
7.12
16.61
0.21
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
China United states India Russian
federation
Japan Germany Islamic
republic of
Iran
Canada Nepal
CO2emissionsintonnes
tonnes CO 2 / capita
2009
2014
International Energy Agency (IEA) organization CO2 Emissions From Fuel Combustion
Example of Individual-level
analysis
Each variable is assigned to every subject in the study
17
18. Eg: Air pollution and case fatality of SARS in the
People's Republic of China: an ecologic study
Cui et al. Air pollution and case fatality of SARS in China
Example of Partially ecologic
analysis
Additional information on certain joint distribution (M,N or A/B
frequency) but we still do not know the full joint distribution of
variables
18
19. Mortality by inequality (Robin Hood index) in United States
(abbreviations are for each state).
Bruce P Kennedy et al. BMJ 1996;312:1004-1007
Example of Partially ecologic
analysis
Additional information on certain joint distribution (M,N or A/B
frequency) but we still do not know the full joint distribution of
variables
19
20. Ecological and individual level analysis of risk factors for HIV infection
in four urban populations in sub-Saharan Africa with different levels of
HIV infection
Example of Multi-level analysis
Combines data collected at two or more levels
Source: Auvert et.al. 2001 20
21. Levels of Inference in Ecologic Studies
• Inference is the process of evolving from
observations and axioms to generalizations.
usually with calculated degrees of uncertainty
• Inference is the generalization of results from a
sample to the population from which the sample
came.
21
22. Levels of Inference in Ecologic Studies
Eg: When we draw inferences from normally
distributed data, base on the relationships of
mean and SD to the normal curve (illustrated in
Figure) when we draw inferences from data and
appears normal, we assume that the population
of sample data came to the normally distributed.
then assume that if we had all possible
observations from that population, we would find
that 68.3%, 95.5%, and 99.7% of the population
would lie between the mean and ___, __, __SD
Also assume that 95%CI
__%, ___ %, and ___ %
22
23. Areas under the normal curve that lie between 1, 2,
and 3 standard deviations on each side of the mean
23
24. Levels of Inference in Ecologic Studies
1. Biologic (Individual) inferences
About effects on individual risks
Eg. counselling: people's tobacco smoke is a cause of lung cancer.
2. Ecologic inferences
Ecological inferences about effect on group rate
Magnitude of ecologic effect depend not only one biologic
effect but also on degree and pattern of compliance with
polices, lows act in groups.
Validity of ecologic effect estimate depends on our ability to
control for differences among groups in joint distribution of
confounders including individual level variables
Eg.harmful effect i.e 90% coverege of negative effect on
Source: Morgenstern 1982
Connor et al. 1984
Valkanen 1966
24
25. Levels of Inference in Ecologic Studies
• Cross-level inferences
– Here, ecologic inference doesn’t always match the level of analysis
– It are often made ecological effects are interpreted as individual effects and
this is vulnerable to bias
– Eg. Explicit or implicit objective of ecological analysis may be to male a
individual inference about the effect of a specific exposure on individual
disease risk.
• Contextual effect
– Ecologic exposure on individual risk is also biologic inference
– If the ecologic exposure is an aggregate measure, we would generally want to separate
its effect for the effect of individual level analog.
– Eg. We might estimate the contextual effect of living in a poor area on risk of disease,
controlling for individual poverty level.
Source: Rothman
Humphreys 199125
27. Example: ecologic effect
E.g. Do rates of motorcycle-related mortality of riders vary
across different states that have different helmet laws in place
27
28. Conclusion
• The correlation at the group level was valid. It
was only invalid as a statement of individual
causal effect.
• Ecologic exposure on individual risk is also
biologic inference
• Despite these advantages, ecologic analysis
poses problems of interpretation when
making inferences at the individual level.
28
29. References
1. Ecologic study. (n.d.) Medical Dictionary for the Health Professions and
Nursing. (2012). Retrieved May 2 2017 from http://medical-
dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/ecologic+study
2. Rothman KJ, Greenland S, Lash TL. Modern epidemiology (3rd ed.). Wolterd
Kluwer Pvt: New Dilhi; 2009.
3. Morgenstern H. Ecologic Studies in Epidemiology: Concepts, Principles, and
Methods. Annual Review of Public Health 1995; Vol. 16: 61-81.
4. Morgenstern H. Ecological studies. In: Modern Epidemiology. 3rd Edition.
Editors: Rothman, Greenland, Lash. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, 2008.
6. Ouellet JV, Kasantikul V. Motorcycle helmet effect on a per-crash basis in
Thailand and the United States. Traffic injury prevention. 2006 Mar 1;7(1):49-
54. Cui Y, Zhang ZF, Froines J, Zhao J, Wang H, Yu SZ, Detels R. Air pollution
and case fatality of SARS in the People's Republic of China: an ecologic study.
Environmental Health. 2003 Nov 20;2(1):15.
7. Nau, Henry R. Perspectives on International Relations, 2ndEdition, CQ Press,
2009.
8. Michael Beaney . "Analysis". The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Michael Beaney. Retrieved 23 May 2012
29
30. References
9. Kleinbaum DG, Kupper LL, Morgenstern H. Epidemiologic research: principles and
quantitative methods. John Wiley & Sons; 1982 May 15.
10. Morgenstern H. Uses of ecologic analysis in epidemiologic research. American
journal of public health. 1982 Dec;72(12):1336-44.
11. Connor MJ, Gillings D. An empiric study of ecological inference. American journal of
public health. 1984 Jun;74(6):555-9.
12. Valkonen T. Individual and structural effects in ecological research. Helsingin
yliopiston Sosiologian laitoksen; 1966.
13. Humphreys K, Carr-Hill R. Area variations in health outcomes: artefact or ecology.
International Journal of Epidemiology. 1991 Mar 1;20(1):251-8.
14. Wynder EL, Taioli E, Fujita Y. Ecologic study of lung cancer risk factors in the US and
Japan, with special reference to smoking and diet. Japanese journal of cancer
research. 1992 May 1;83(5):418-23.
15. Auvert B, Buvé A, Ferry B, Caraël M, Morison L, Lagarde E, Robinson NJ, Kahindo M,
Chege J, Rutenberg N, Musonda R. Ecological and individual level analysis of risk
factors for HIV infection in four urban populations in sub-Saharan Africa with
different levels of HIV infection. Aids. 2001 Aug 1;15:S15-30.
30
Spatial epidemiology is a subfield of health geography focused on the study of the spatial distribution of health outcomes.
Specifically, spatial epidemiology is concerned with the description and examination of disease and its geographic variations. This is done in consideration of “demographic, environmental, behavioral, socioeconomic, genetic, and infections risk factors.
Example:
Ecological fallacy arises from thinking that relationships observed for groups necessarily hold for individuals: if provinces with more Protestants tend to have higher suicide rates, then Protestants must be more likely to commit suicide; if countries with more fat in the diet have higher rates of breast cancer, then women who eat fatty foods must be more likely to get breast cancer.
•Such inferences made using group-level data may not always be correct at the individual level.
•Ecological bias can be interpreted as the failure of associations seen at one level of grouping to correspond to effect measures at the grouping level of interest.
•For example, associations seen using country-level data may not correlate with associations that exist at the individual or neighborhood-level.
Ecological fallacy arises from thinking that relationships observed for groups necessarily hold for individuals: if provinces with more Protestants tend to have higher suicide rates, then Protestants must be more likely to commit suicide; if countries with more fat in the diet have higher rates of breast cancer, then women who eat fatty foods must be more likely to get breast cancer.
•Such inferences made using group-level data may not always be correct at the individual level.
•Ecological bias can be interpreted as the failure of associations seen at one level of grouping to correspond to effect measures at the grouping level of interest.
•For example, associations seen using country-level data may not correlate with associations that exist at the individual or neighborhood-level.
Incomplete designs ecologic is frequently used whe data are not readily available for conductiong another type of study. It is often relatively inexpensiive on convenient to make use of secoandary data sources to test or generete hypothesis with these design before spending considerablly more time and money on primary data collection.
Missing : ecological design are studies in which information is missing on one or more relevant factors. Since we can never know whether all distorting influences.
More information : International Energy Agency (IEA) organization CO2 Emissions From Fuel Combustion:
http://www.iea.org/
Reference: Mortality by inequality (Robin Hood index) in United States (abbreviations are for each state)
The Robin Hood Index is conceptually one of the simplest measures of inequality used in econometrics. It is equal to the portion of the total community income that would have to be redistributed (taken from the richer half of the population and given to the poorer half) for the society to live in perfect equality.
The Robin Hood index is based on the Lorenz Curve and is closely tied to the better known inequality measure the Gini coefficient which is also based on the Lorenz curve.
In layman words, the Robin Hood index is the proportion of money needed to be transferred from the rich to the poor to achieve equality.
The Lorenz Curve is a graphical representation of the proportionality of a distribution. It represents a probability distribution of statistical values, and is often associated with income distribution calculations and commonly used in the analysis of inequality.
The Gini Coefficient is a way to measure equity and is derived from the Lorenz curve.
The Gini coefficient is defined graphically as a ratio of two surfaces involving the summation of all vertical deviations between the Lorenz curve and the perfect equality line (A) divided by the difference between the perfect equality and perfect inequality lines (A+B).
The Gini coefficient is defined as a ratio with values between 0 and 1.
How the Robin Hood Index is calculated
The Robin Hood index is equivalent to the maximum vertical distance between the Lorenz curve, or the cumulative portion of the total income held below a certain income percentile, and the Perfect Equality Line, that is the 45 degree line of equal incomes.
The value of the index approximates the share of total income that needs to be transferred from households above the mean to those below the mean to achieve equality in the distribution of incomes.
The Robin Hood index values
The Robin Hood index is a measure of income inequality ranging from 0 (complete equality) to 100 (complete inequality).
Analysis begins with describing the characteristics of the subjects and progresses to calculating rates, creating comparative tables (e.g., two-by-two tables), and computing measures of association (e.g., risk ratios and odds ratios), tests of statistical significance (e.g., chi-square), confidence intervals, and the like.
The fundamentals of ecologic analysis can best be presented by dividing ecologic study designs into four types.
The simplest of these is the exploratory study in which we observe geographic differences in the disease rate among several regions (groups). The objective is to search for spatial patterns that might suggest an environmental etiology or a special etiologic hypothesis. No exposures are measured and, generally, no formal data analysis is used. For example, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) mapped the age-adjusted cancer mortality rates in the US by county for the period 1950-69
For oral cancers, they found a striking difference in geographic patterns by sex: among men.
In the multiple-group comparison study, we observe the association between the average exposure level (X) and the disease rate (Y) among several groups. We can quantify and test this ecologic association by regressing Y on X, i.e., by fitting the data to a mathematical model5, such as Y = Bo + BIX (4)
where Y is the predicted value of Y for any given value of X, B1 is the estimated slope, and Bo is the estimated Yintercept.
In the time trend study (or time series study), we observe the relationship between the change in the average
exposure level (or intervention) and the change in the disease rate for a single population. t With time trend studies involving a sudden change in exposure, such as the start of an intervention program, we compare the slope in the disease trend before and after the intervention. For example, in Figure 2, the age-adjusted mortality rates for two infectious diseases are graphed for the period 1900-1973.
In the mixed study, we observe the relationship between the change in the average exposure level and the change in the disease rate among several groups. The analysis and interpretation of such data are similar to that of the comparison study; the only difference is that in the mixed design both variables are measured as absolute changes between the same two times (or periods).7 Thus, we can estimate the risk ratio (RR), the correlation coefficient (R), and the etiologic fraction (EF) from the ecologic regression coefficients, using expressions 5, 6, and 3. Frequently, it is more convenient or informative to categorize the exposure variable and to compare the changes in disease rate among groups having different mean exposure levels. For example,
Crawford, et al,'3 observed the absolute changes in the average annual cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality rate
The fundamentals of ecologic analysis can best be presented by dividing ecologic study designs into four types.
The simplest of these is the exploratory study in which we observe geographic differences in the disease rate among several regions (groups). The objective is to search for spatial patterns that might suggest an environmental etiology or a special etiologic hypothesis. No exposures are measured and, generally, no formal data analysis is used. For example, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) mapped the age-adjusted cancer mortality rates in the US by county for the period 1950.69.2 For oral cancers, they found a striking difference in geographic patterns by sex: among men.
In the multiple-group comparison study, we observe the association between the average exposure level (X) and the disease rate (Y) among several groups. We can quantify and test this ecologic association by regressing Y on X, i.e., by fitting the data to a mathematical model5, such as Y = Bo + BIX (4)
where Y is the predicted value of Y for any given value of X, B1 is the estimated slope, and Bo is the estimated Yintercept.
In the time trend study (or time series study), we observe the relationship between the change in the average
exposure level (or intervention) and the change in the disease rate for a single population. t With time trend studies involving a sudden change in exposure, such as the start of an intervention program, we compare the slope in the disease trend before and after the intervention. For example, in Figure 2, the age-adjusted mortality rates for two infectious diseases are graphed for the period 1900-1973.
In the mixed study, we observe the relationship between the change in the average exposure level and the change in the disease rate among several groups. The analysis and interpretation of such data are similar to that of the comparison study; the only difference is that in the mixed design both variables are measured as absolute changes between the same two times (or periods).7 Thus, we can estimate the risk ratio (RR), the correlation coefficient (R), and the etiologic fraction (EF) from the ecologic regression coefficients, using expressions 5, 6, and 3. Frequently, it is more convenient or informative to categorize the exposure variable and to compare the changes in disease rate among groups having different mean exposure levels. For example,
Crawford, et al,'3 observed the absolute changes in the average annual cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality rate
More information : International Energy Agency (IEA) organization CO2 Emissions From Fuel Combustion:
http://www.iea.org/
Reference: Mortality by inequality (Robin Hood index) in United States (abbreviations are for each state)
The Robin Hood Index is conceptually one of the simplest measures of inequality used in econometrics. It is equal to the portion of the total community income that would have to be redistributed (taken from the richer half of the population and given to the poorer half) for the society to live in perfect equality.
The Robin Hood index is based on the Lorenz Curve and is closely tied to the better known inequality measure the Gini coefficient which is also based on the Lorenz curve.
In layman words, the Robin Hood index is the proportion of money needed to be transferred from the rich to the poor to achieve equality.
The Lorenz Curve is a graphical representation of the proportionality of a distribution. It represents a probability distribution of statistical values, and is often associated with income distribution calculations and commonly used in the analysis of inequality.
The Gini Coefficient is a way to measure equity and is derived from the Lorenz curve.
The Gini coefficient is defined graphically as a ratio of two surfaces involving the summation of all vertical deviations between the Lorenz curve and the perfect equality line (A) divided by the difference between the perfect equality and perfect inequality lines (A+B).
The Gini coefficient is defined as a ratio with values between 0 and 1.
How the Robin Hood Index is calculated
The Robin Hood index is equivalent to the maximum vertical distance between the Lorenz curve, or the cumulative portion of the total income held below a certain income percentile, and the Perfect Equality Line, that is the 45 degree line of equal incomes.
The value of the index approximates the share of total income that needs to be transferred from households above the mean to those below the mean to achieve equality in the distribution of incomes.
The Robin Hood index values
The Robin Hood index is a measure of income inequality ranging from 0 (complete equality) to 100 (complete inequality).
inference The process of evolving from observations and axioms to generalizations. In statistics, the development of generalization from sample data, usually with calculated degrees of uncertainty. Causal inference from observational data is a key task of epidemiology and other sciences as sociology, education, behavioral sciences, demography, economics, or health services research; these disciplines share methodological frameworks for causal inference
Sometimes we calculate measures of location and dispersion to describe a particular set of data. At other times, when the data represent a sample from a larger population, we might want to generalize from our sample to the larger population that the data came from—or, said another way, we want to draw inferences from the data. A large body of statistical methods is available to allow us to do this. In this section, we will look at some of the methods for drawing inferences from data that are normally distributed.
When we draw inferences from normally distributed data, we base our conclusions on the relationships of the standard deviation and the mean to the normal curve. We use these relationships, which were illustrated in Figure 3.9, when we draw inferences from data. When the graph of a frequency distribution appears normal, we assume that the population of data our sample came from is normally distributed. We then assume that if we had all possible observations from that population of data, we would find that 68.3%, 95.5%, and 99.7% of the population would lie between the mean and ―SD
inference The process of evolving from observations and axioms to generalizations. In statistics, the development of generalization from sample data, usually with calculated degrees of uncertainty. Causal inference from observational data is a key task of epidemiology and other sciences as sociology, education, behavioral sciences, demography, economics, or health services research; these disciplines share methodological frameworks for causal inference
Area Variations in Health Outcomes: Artefact or Ecology
KEITH HUMPHREYS & ROY CARR-HILL
It is a long-standing belief that the size of the difference between the poor (lower social groups) and the rich (higher social groups) in health outcomes will vary according to the characteristics of the area. However typical approaches to analyses of this kind of question violate standard statistical assumption.
The basic problem is how to estimate the size of a ‘ward effect’ (the disadvantage of living in a ‘poor’ ward over and above effects associated with individual or household circumstances). This is complicated by the hypothesized existence of intra-ward correlated errors; the only way to avoid this bias is to explicitly model the different variance components using multi-level modelling techniques. The purpose of this paper is to illustrate this technique.
Analysis using several of the health outcomes in the Health and Lifestyle Survey data, suggests that the ward effect is quite substantial, and remains after ‘controlling for’ age, gender and several other socio-demographic variables. This ‘ward effect’ appears to be best represented by the proportions without access to a car and the preponderance of working class members (RGSC IV and V) in the population.
Whilst the verdict on the original hypothesis remains ‘not proven’, the hypothesis has been shown to be more complex than its simplistic statement suggests. The analyses have shown how to unpack these complexities and, more generally, have illustrated the power of the multi-level modelling technique.