Week 5 Topic Discussion

[Saranath]

In the literature review related to your research topic, please select a publication that used either cohort or case-control study design. Then describe:
The title of the paper. (You may provide a link to access the paper)
– Main objectives of the study
– Main exposure variable of interest
– Main outcome variable of interest
– Limitations of the study

[tullaya.sita]

In the literature review related to CDSS I found one interesting publication of cohort study design as described below.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4601128/

Title: A two-stage clinical decision support system for early recognition and stratification of patients with sepsis: an observational cohort study
Main objectives of the study: To examined the program’s accuracy in identifying patients at risk of sepsis, the performance of clinical processes, and clinical outcomes.
Main exposure variable of interest: patients got an alert from CDSS as “severe sepsis alert”
Main outcome variable of interest: patients got a confirmed diagnosis from the provider “suspected infection” and an order from the provider in a manner that implies a response to sepsis as “Microbiology culture and IV/PO antibiotics”
Limitations to this study:
1. The setting was a single centre, which may not be generalisable to other clinical settings also the rate of adoption of CDSS may be different.
2. The programme’s adoption by providers may not be fully known because the study began a few weeks after the CDS go-live date; some variance in usability and fidelity may exist because the sepsis programme enabled by the two-stage CDS was relatively new to providers.
3. the study design incorporated a retrospective analysis of cohort data after the launch of the sepsis programme, which may have introduced some selection bias
4. Although the sepsis programme is grounded in current guidelines. However, the guidelines evolve over time and the sepsis programme should evolve too.

[w.thanachol]

I reviewed this paper “Do psychiatric patients experience more psychiatric symptoms during COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown? A case-control study with service and research implications for immunopsychiatry” via this link “https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7184991/”
This study aimed to assess and compare the immediate stress and psychological impact experienced by people with and without psychiatric illnesses during the peak of the COVID-19 epidemic with strict lockdown measures.
– Main exposure variable of interest
Control: The healthy control participants were recruited through convenient sampling
Case: All psychiatric patients must be aged 18 years or above and be previously diagnosed by psychiatrists to suffer from F32 Major Depressive Disorder–single episode, F33 Major depressive disorder–recurrent episodes, F41 other anxiety disorders including generalised anxiety disorder, panic disorder, and F41·8 mixed anxiety and depressive disorder based on the ICD-10 criteria.
– Main outcome variable of interest
the psychological impact of the COVID-19 epidemic measured using the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R) that measures post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms in survivorship during COVID-19 pandemic.
– Limitations of the study
Selection bias from convenient sampling as psychiatric patients who have more symptoms tends to respond to the questionnaire more.
Information bias as healthy people might not want to answer in a way that makes them looks like stress persons.

[Ameen]

Title :
Case-Control Study of Use of Personal Protective Measures and Risk for SARS-CoV 2 Infection, Thailand

https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/11/20-3003_article

Main objectives of the study
To evaluate the effectiveness of personal protective measures against SARS-CoV-2 infections.

Main exposure variable of interest
Both of the cases and the control groups were recruited from the contact tracing conducted by Surveillance and Rapid Response Teams of Thailand’s ministry of public health. All of the cohorts were asymptomatic at the time of recruitment.

The variable of interest was maintaining of personal protective measures (mask-wearing, hand washing and social distancing) during the time having contact with the confirmed COVID-19 cases.

The main outcome variable of interest :
Case: Persons who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2
Control: Persons who were negative for SARS-CoV-2

Limitations of the study
1. The cohort was recruited from 3 different settings which the result might not represent all the setting.
2. All of the cohorts were in contact with index cases. The analysis might not be an answer for another possible transmission in the community.
3. The controls cohort includes those who did not get tested due to the testing requirement, the low risk. They could have been infected. However, a small proportion of the group would not affect the result.
4. Since the contact record was self-reporting by the cohort, there might have missing of important contact or they might have contact with more than one confirmed cases.
5. Since the data collection was a retrospective; memory bias, observer bias, and information bias might occur. However, the interviewer was instructed to use structured interviews to reduce bias.

[Pacharapol Withayasakpunt]

Are Patients With Cancer Less Willing to Share Their Health Information? Privacy, Sensitivity, and Social Purpose

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4575401/

– Main objectives of the study

Growing use of electronic health information increases opportunities to build population cancer databases for research and care delivery. Understanding patient views on reuse of health information is essential to shape privacy policies and build trust in these initiatives.

– Main exposure variable of interest

We randomly assigned nationally representative participants (N = 3,336) with and without prior cancer to six of 18 scenarios describing different uses of electronic health information. The scenarios varied the user, use, and sensitivity of the information.

– Main outcome variable of interest

Participants rated each scenario on a scale of 1 to 10 assessing their willingness to share their electronic health information.

– Limitations of the study

First, the study was not originally powered to detect differences between cancer versus noncancer participants. This limits our ability to test for more complex interactions. Second, we do not know when the respondents were diagnosed with cancer or the type of cancer. Patients with a current or recent diagnosis of cancer or patients with specific types of cancer with different levels of heritability might have different preferences regarding reuse of their health information. For example, cancers that are familial, more consequential, or occur at a younger age might yield different views about information sharing. Third, we tested only two different levels of sensitivity in our conjoint experiment. Had we included a broader range of possibilities, we might have found that sensitivity was more or less important. Nevertheless, the finding that cancer participants were more favorable toward reuse of their health information when genetic information is included is a novel finding. Fourth, we presented participants with hypothetical scenarios rather than observing real-world decisions. Therefore, we were unable to measure how actual changes in behavior would be correlated with effect sizes in our experiment. However, responses to hypothetical scenarios have been shown to be highly predictive of behavior. In addition, we used a controlled experimental design that is more likely to reveal individual preferences than static survey questions.

[imktd8]

For the research that related to my research topic is to study abount the relation of online search and covid-19 disease.
1. The title of the paper : Are online searches for the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) related to media or epidemiology? A cross-sectional study
url: https://reader.elsevier.com/reader/sd/pii/S1201971220304641?token=9F9511F96DDE2A1FBB0B2684176EBD06F28C70ED72ED538A88DF436D4F57B34EAA1EB2FAF3111B46A7D8CC2362BA2BE7&originRegion=eu-west-1&originCreation=20210504043312
2. Main objectives of the study : To determine if online searches for COVID-19 related to international mediaannouncements or national epidemiology
3. Main exposure variable of interest: The online COVID-19 searches and the announcements by the World Health Organization (WHO).
4. Main outcome variable of interest: Online searches for COVID-19 in Europe are not correlated with epidemiology but stronglycorrelated with international WHO announcements.
5. Limitations of the study:
– Lack of the demographics study (i.e. age, gender, location or education level)of online searches and COVID-19 cases were not taken intoanalysis.
– There are not vary media which is studies in this study. This focused only on WHO announcement.

[Author]

Posts