Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
55 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Health Indicator
|
a marker of health status (physics or mental disease, impairments or disability, and social well-being), service provision or resource availability ex: birth rate, fertility rate
|
|
|
birth rate
|
live births/population
|
|
|
fertility rate
|
life births/pop of women 25-44
|
|
|
contraceptive prevalance
|
proportion of women of reproductive age who are using contraceptives
|
|
|
mortality
|
epidemiologic and vital statistics term for death
|
|
|
vital statistics registration
|
register births, deaths, marriages/divorces, fetal deaths, residents
|
|
|
death certificate
|
date of birth, age, place of death, place of residence, occupation, sex, cause of death, marital status, other:
main cause contributing causes existing diseases and conditions |
|
|
crude mortality
|
# of deaths/pop
|
|
|
cause specific mortality
|
# of deaths from cause/pop
|
|
|
infant mortality rate
|
# of deaths among infants age 0-1/live births
|
|
|
neonatal mortality rate
|
# of deaths among infants less than 28 days/ live births
|
|
|
post neonatal mortality rate
|
# of deaths between 28 days and 1 year/ live births
|
|
|
perinatal mortality rate
|
# of still births and deaths in infants 6days or younger / # births live & still
|
|
|
fetal death rate
|
# of fetal deaths after atleast 20 weeks gestation/# live and still births
|
|
|
abortion rate
|
# abortions/# women age 14-44
|
|
|
years potential life lost
|
quantify premature mortality
related to value of human life and implications of loss improvements in life expectancy can increase work force and productivity |
|
|
maternal mortality rate
|
# deaths due to childbirth/#live births
|
|
|
analytical epi
|
answer why and how. tests hypotheses. comparison group
|
|
|
types of analytical studies
|
1 observational (casecontrol and cohort [prospective/retrospective])
2 experimental |
|
|
where do cases come from
|
PH clinics
physician office health maintenance org hospitals govt sources |
|
|
where do controls come from
|
general pop
hospital family friends relatives |
|
|
exposure status info obtained through
|
med records
interviews questionnaires surrogates |
|
|
odds ratio
|
measure the assoc between exposure and outcome
|
|
|
selection bias
|
relationship between exposure and disease would be different in population
|
|
|
recall bias
|
accuracy difference between controls and cases
|
|
|
interviewer bias CC
|
interviewer probes cases differently than controls
|
|
|
confounding
|
extrinsic factor is associated with a diseas outcome and independent of that association is also associated with the exposure
|
|
|
control for bias CC
|
matching
|
|
|
control for bias in cohort
|
healthy worker bias may be avoided by selecting a comparison group made up of workers, only exposed
|
|
|
health worker bias cohort
|
workers are more healthy than general
|
|
|
loss to follow up
|
researchers lose contact
|
|
|
how to prevent loss to follow up
|
get contact info
pick people likely to stay in incentives |
|
|
experimental studies
|
establish cause and effect relationships
|
|
|
between group design
|
compared between two or more groups. strongest
|
|
|
within group design
|
before/after studies.
|
|
|
controlled trial
|
analyze individual; clinical trials
|
|
|
community trial
|
analyze communities; one group receives intervention, another doesn't
|
|
|
natural experiment
|
happens almost accidentally
|
|
|
random assignment
|
intervention and control groups are as similar as possible
|
|
|
blinding
|
subjects
investigators analyses |
|
|
assembling cohort
|
inclusion or exclusion criteria
|
|
|
selecting treatments
|
what is objective? are the ysafe? strong enough?
|
|
|
selecting the patient pop
|
most efficient vs best for generalizing
|
|
|
phase 1
|
unblinded, uncontrolled, less than 30 patients. determine safety
|
|
|
phase 2
|
up to 50 people, randomized, blinded, test dosage, side effects, tolerability,
|
|
|
phase 3
|
larger, thousands. random assignment, test efficacy of new treatment
|
|
|
ethics
|
benefits, risks, subject, society
|
|
|
causal inference
|
conclusion about presence of a health related state, and reasons for its existence
|
|
|
predisposing factors
|
already present that produce a susceptibility or disposition in a host to a disease or condition without actually causing it
|
|
|
reinforcing factors
|
negative or positive; improve control of disease or aggravate disease
|
|
|
enabling factors
|
affect health through an environmental factor
|
|
|
precipitating factors
|
essential to development of diseases etc
|
|
|
causal criteria
|
strength of association
consistency specificity temporality biologic gradient biological plausibility experimental evidence |
|
|
field epi
|
application of epi
problem is unexpected timely response travel to and work in field time limited |
|
|
steps in field epi
|
1 establish existence
2 confirm diagnosis 3 establish criteria for case ID 4 search for missing cases 5 count cases 6orient data according to person place time 7 classify epidemic 8 determine who is at risk 9 analyze data 10 hypothesis 11 test hypothesis 12 develop reports and inform 13 control and prevention 14 admin and planning |
