Foundations of Epidemiology
Foundations of Epidemiology
Foundations of Epidemiology
COURSE OUTLINE
WEEK TOPIC LECTURES
15&16-Exams
3
LECTURE 1
INTRODUCTION OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
Lecture Overview
Epidemiology is the study of the distribution and determinants of health-related states or events
(including disease), and the application of this study to the control of diseases and other health
problems.(WHO)
c) a tool for public health action to promote and protect the public's health based on science, causal
reasoning, and a dose of practical common sense
“Epidemiology is the study of the distribution and determinants of health-related states or events in
specified populations, and the application of this study to the control of health problems.”
“Epidemiology is the study of the distribution and determinants of disease frequency in man.”
These definitions of epidemiology include several terms which reflect some of the important
principles of the discipline:
4
Study - Epidemiology is a scientific discipline and has at its foundation, sound methods of
scientific inquiry.
Distribution - Epidemiology is concerned with the frequency and pattern of health events in a
population.
Frequency includes not only the number of such events in a population, but also the rate or risk of
disease in the population.
Pattern refers to the occurrence of health-related events by time, place, and personal characteristics.
Time characteristics include annual occurrence, seasonal occurrence, and daily or even
hourly occurrence.
Place characteristics include geographic variation, urban-rural differences, and location of
work sites or schools, for example.
Personal characteristics include demographic factors such as age, race, sex, marital status,
and socioeconomic status, as well as behaviors ( such as occupation or risk-taking activity)
resulting in environmental exposures.
Determinants - Epidemiology is often used to search for causes and other factors that influence the
occurrence of health-related events such as diseases, syndromes, and injuries. Analytic
epidemiology attempts to provide the Why and How of such events by comparing groups with
different rates of disease occurrence and with differences in demographic characteristics, genetic or
immunologic make-up, behaviors, environmental exposures, and other so-called potential risk
factors. Under ideal circumstances, epidemiologic findings provide sufficient evidence to direct
swift and effective public health control and prevention measures.
Although epidemiology as a discipline has blossomed since World War II, epidemiologic thinking
has been traced from Hippocrates through John Graunt, William Farr, John Snow, and others. The
contributions of some of these early and more recent thinkers are described below
Hippocrates attempted to explain disease occurrence from a rational rather than a supernatural
viewpoint. In his essay entitled “On Airs, Waters, and Places,” Hippocrates suggested that
environmental and host factors such as behaviors might influence the development of disease.
1662
5
Another early contributor to epidemiology was John Graunt, a London haberdasher and
councilman who published a landmark analysis of mortality data in 1662. This publication was the
first to quantify patterns of birth, death, and disease occurrence, noting disparities between males
and females, high infant mortality, urban/rural differences, and seasonal variations.
1800
William Farr built upon Graunt's work by systematically collecting and analyzing Britain's
mortality statistics. Farr, considered the father of modern vital statistics and surveillance, developed
many of the basic practices used today in vital statistics and disease classification. He concentrated
his efforts on collecting vital statistics, assembling and evaluating those data, and reporting to
responsible health authorities and the general public.
1854
In the mid-1800s, an anesthesiologist named John Snow was conducting a series of investigations
in London that warrant his being considered the “father of field epidemiology.” Twenty years
before the development of the microscope, Snow conducted studies of cholera outbreaks both to
discover the cause of disease and to prevent its recurrence.
Snow conducted one of his now famous studies in 1854 when an epidemic of cholera erupted in the
Golden Square of London. He began his investigation by determining where in this area persons
with cholera lived and worked
Because Snow believed that water was a source of infection for cholera, he marked the location of
water pumps on his spot map, then looked for a relationship between the distribution of households
with cases of cholera and the location of pumps.
Snow's second investigation reexamined data from the 1854 cholera outbreak in London.
In the mid- and late-1800s, epidemiological methods began to be applied in the investigation of
disease occurrence. At that time, most investigators focused on acute infectious diseases. In the
1930s and 1940s, epidemiologists extended their methods to noninfectious diseases. The period
since World War II has seen an explosion in the development of research methods and the
theoretical underpinnings of epidemiology. Epidemiology has been applied to the entire range of
health-related outcomes, behaviors, and even knowledge and attitudes. The studies by Doll and Hill
linking lung cancer to smoking and the study of cardiovascular disease among residents of
Framingham, Massachusetts two examples of how pioneering researchers have applied
epidemiologic methods to chronic disease since World War II. During the 1960s and early 1970s
health workers applied epidemiologic methods to eradicate naturally occurring smallpox
worldwide.This was an achievement in applied epidemiology of unprecedented proportions.
In the 1980s, epidemiology was extended to the studies of injuries and violence. In the 1990s, the
related fields of molecular and genetic epidemiology (expansion of epidemiology to look at
specific pathways, molecules and genes that influence risk of developing disease) took root.
Meanwhile, infectious diseases continued to challenge epidemiologists as new infectious agents
emerged (Ebola virus, Human Immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/ Acquired Immunodeficiency
Syndrome (AIDS)), were identified (Legionella, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS)), or
6
changed (drug-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis, Avian influenza). Beginning in the 1990s and
accelerating after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, epidemiologists have had to consider
not only natural transmission of infectious organisms but also deliberate spread through biologic
warfare and bioterrorism.
Today, public health workers throughout the world accept and use epidemiology regularly to
characterize the health of their communities and to solve day-to-day problems, large and small.
Thacker SB. Historical development. In: Teutsch SM, Churchill RE, editors. Principles and
practice of public health surveillance, 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2002.
USESOF EPIDEMIOLOGY
1. To study the history of the health of populations, and of the rise and fall of diseases and changes
in their character.
2. To diagnose the health of the community and the condition of the people.
4. To estimate from the group experience what are the individual risks on average of disease,
accident and defect, and the chances of avoiding them.
6. To complete the clinical picture of chronic diseases and describe their natural history: by
including in due proportion all kinds of disease.
7. To search for causes of health and disease by computing the experience of groups defined by
their composition, inheritance and experience, their behaviour [sic] and environments.
opportunity and sometimes by planned experiments.
Activity 1.1
_______________________________________________________________________________
__________________
PRINCIPLES OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
In epidemiology, the health professionals must be able to describe the distribution and determinants
of health states and events. Distribution of health states or events refers to the description of the
frequency and patterns of health events in a population. Frequency is measured by rates and risks
of health events in a population; the pattern refers to the occurrence of health related events by
time, place and personal characteristics. Determinants are causes and other factors that influence
the occurrence of health related events. These include death, illness and disability as well as
positive health states and the means to improve health. Epidemiology seeks to identify the
determinants of health and disease.
The principles of the approach used in epidemiology revolve around studying health related events
by asking the following questions:
a. What? This is the case definition. It is the standard criteria for deciding whether or not a person
has a particular disease or health related event. A case definition consists of clinical criteria,
sometimes with limitations on time, place and person. The clinical criteria includes confirmatory
laboratory tests, if available, or a combination of symptoms (complaints) and signs (physical
findings), and other supportive evidence. e.g. acute onset of flaccid paralysis of one or more limbs
with decreased or absent tendon reflexes in the affected limbs, without other apparent cause and
without sensory or cognitive loss (Center for Disease Control on definition of paralytic
poliomyelitis). Application of these standard criteria ensures that every case is diagnosed in the
same way regardless of when and where it occurred. This allows for comparison of rates of
occurrence between populations overtime.
b. Who? Individual counting the number of persons involved in a health event is one of the basic
steps of epidemiological investigation. Simple count of cases does not adequately compare the
occurrence of disease in different populations or during different times so these are converted to
rates. These relate to the number of cases in the size of the population. Since personal attributes are
8
often associated with health events, differences in the distribution of these factors should also be
considered while comparing occurrence of health events between populations.
c. Where? Place. Health events are described by the location in order to gain insight into the
geographical difference or the extent of the event. The place can be that of residence, birth or
employment, a district, state or country of a health event. Analyzing data by place can also give
clues to the source of agents that cause disease and their mode of transmission e.g., in identifying
the source of the causal agent while investigating an outbreak, a spot map may be used.
d) When? Time. Rates of occurrence of disease often change with time. Long-term or secular
trends can be plotted over time as annual rates. The trends can be used to suggest or predict the
future incidence of a disease and to evaluate programmes or policy decisions, to suggest what
caused an increase or decrease in the occurrence of a disease. This can be displayed as a graph.
e) Why? Causes. Besides describing the levels and patterns in occurrence of health events by
person, place and time, epidemiology is concerned with the search for causes and effects. This can
quantify association between potential determinants and health events, and test hypothesis about
causal relationships. The various epidemiological study designs have the basic principle of making
unbiased comparison between a group with and without the determinants or health event under
investigation.
Activity 1.2
You
have come to the end of the Lecture where you have covered the following:-
Definition of Epidemiology
Historical
evolution of epidemiology
uses of Epidemiology
9
Principles of Epidemiology
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
LECTURE 2
DISEASE CAUSATION
Lecture Overview
In the previous lecture we have introduced Epidemiology and its concepts where we have seen that
it deals with prevention and control of diseases amongst other factors. But then how does a disease
came about? This lecture will look at the disease causation ,natural history,prognosis of disease .
Causation
A number of models of disease causation have been proposed. Among the simplest of these is the
epidemiologic triad or triangle, the traditional model for infectious disease. The triad consists of an
external agent, a susceptible host, and an environment that brings the host and agent together. In
this model, disease results from the interaction between the agent and the susceptible host in an
environment that supports transmission of the agent from asource to that host. Two ways of
depicting this model are shown in Figure 1.
11
.
Agent, host, and environmental factors interrelate in a variety of complex ways to produce disease.
Different diseases require different balances and interactions of these three components.
Development of appropriate, practical, and effective public health measures to control or prevent
disease usually requires assessment of all three components and their interactions.
Host refers to the human who can get the disease. A variety of factors intrinsic to the host,
sometimes called risk factors, can influence an individual’s exposure, susceptibility, or response to
a causative agent. Opportunities for exposure are often influenced by behaviors such as sexual
practices, hygiene, and other personal choices as well as by age and sex. Susceptibility and
response to an agent are influenced by factors such as genetic composition, nutritional and
immunologic status, anatomic structure, presence of disease or medications, and psychological
makeup.
Environment refers to extrinsic factors that affect the agent and the opportunity for exposure.
Environmental factors include physical factors such as geology and climate, biologic factors such
as insects that transmit the agent, and socioeconomic factors such as crowding, sanitation, and the
availability of health services.
12
The component causes may include intrinsic host factors as well as the agent and the environmental
factors of the agent-host environment triad. A single component cause is rarely a sufficient cause
by itself. For example, even exposure to a highly infectious agent such as measles virus does not
invariably result in measles disease. Host susceptibility and other host factors also may play a role.
At the other extreme, an agent that is usually harmless in healthy persons may cause devastating
disease under different conditions. Pneumocystis carinii is an organism that harmlessly colonizes
the respiratory tract of some healthy persons, but can cause potentially lethal pneumonia in persons
whose immune systems have been weakened by human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Presence
of Pneumocystis carinii organisms is therefore a necessary but not
sufficient cause of pneumocystis pneumonia. In Figure 2, it would be represented by component
cause A.
As the model indicates, a particular disease may result from a variety of different sufficient causes
or pathways. For example, lung cancer may result from a sufficient cause that includes smoking as
a component cause. Smoking is not a sufficient cause by itself, however, because not all smokers
develop lung cancer. Neither is smoking a necessary cause, because a small fraction of lung cancer
victims have never smoked. Suppose Component Cause B is smoking and Component Cause C is
asbestos. Sufficient Cause I includes both smoking (B) and asbestos (C). Sufficient Cause II
includes asbestos without smoking, and Sufficient Cause C includes smoking without asbestos. But
because lung cancer can develop in persons who have never been exposed to either smoking or
asbestos, a proper model for lung cancer would have to show at least one more Sufficient Cause
Pie that does not include either component B or component C.
Note that public health action does not depend on the identification of every component cause.
Disease prevention can be accomplished by blocking any single component of a sufficient cause, at
least through that pathway. For example, elimination of smoking (component B) would prevent
lung cancer from sufficient causes I and II, although some lung cancer would still occur
through sufficient cause III.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
The process begins with the appropriate exposure to or accumulation of factors sufficient for the
disease process to begin in a susceptible host. For an infectious disease, the exposure is a
microorganism. For cancer, the exposure may be a factor that initiates the process, such as asbestos
fibers or components in tobacco smoke (for lung cancer), or one that promotes the process, such as
estrogen (for endometrial cancer). After the disease process has been triggered, pathological
changes then occur without the individual being aware of them. This stage of subclinical disease,
extending from the time of exposure to onset of disease symptoms, is usually called the incubation
period for infectious diseases, and the latency period for chronic diseases. During this stage,
disease is said to be asymptomatic (no symptoms) or inapparent. This period may be as brief as
secondsfor hypersensitivity and toxic reactions to as long as decades for certain chronic diseases.
Even for a single disease, the characteristic incubation period has a range. For example, the typical
incubation period for hepatitis A is as long as 7 weeks. The latency period for leukemia to become
evident among survivors of the atomic bomb blast in Hiroshima ranged from 2 to 12 years, peaking
at 6-7 years.44 Incubation periods of selected exposures and diseases varying from minutes to
decades are displayed in
Although disease is not apparent during the incubation period, some pathologic changes may be
detectable with laboratory, radiographic, or other screening methods. Most screening programs
attempt to identify the disease process during this phase of its natural history, since intervention at
this early stage is likely to be more effective than treatment given after the disease has progressed
and become symptomatic.
The onset of symptoms marks the transition from subclinical to clinical disease. Most diagnoses are
made during the stage of clinical disease. In some people, however, the disease process may
never progress to clinically apparent illness. In others, the disease process may result in illness that
ranges from mild to severe or fatal. This range is called the
28
spectrum of disease. Ultimately, the disease process ends either in recovery, disability or death.
For an infectious agent, infectivity refers to the proportion of exposed persons who become
infected. Pathogenicity refers to the proportion of infected individuals who develop clinically
apparent disease. Virulence refers to the proportion of clinically apparent cases that are severe or
fatal.
Because the spectrum of disease can include asymptomatic and mild cases, the cases of illness
diagnosed by clinicians in the community often represent only the tip of the iceberg. Many
additional cases may be too early to diagnose or may never progress to the clinical stage.
Unfortunately, persons with inapparent or undiagnosed infections may nonetheless be able to
transmit infection to others. Such persons who are infectious but have subclinical disease are called
carriers. Frequently, carriers are persons with incubating disease or inapparent infection.
Persons with measles, hepatitis A, and several other diseases become infectious a few days before
the onset of symptoms. However carriers may also be persons who appear to have recovered from
their clinical illness but remain infectious, such as chronic carriers of hepatitis B virus, or persons
who never exhibited symptoms. The challenge to public health workers is that these carriers,
unaware that they are infected and infectious to others, are sometimes more likely to unwittingly
spread infection than are people with obvious illness.
29
Activity 2.1
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
30
31
32
33
34
35
MODES OF TRANSMISSION
An infectious agent may be transmitted from its natural reservoir to a susceptible host in different
ways. There are different classifications for modes of transmission. Here is one classification:
• Direct
Direct contact
Droplet spread
• Indirect
Airborne
Vehicleborne
Vectorborne (mechanical or biologic)
Indirect transmission refers to the transfer of an infectious agent from a reservoir to a host by
suspended air particles, inanimate objects (vehicles), or animate intermediaries (vectors).
Airborne transmission occurs when infectious agents are carried by dust or droplet nuclei
suspended in air. Airborne dust includes material that has settled on surfaces and become
resuspended by air currents as well as infectious particles blown from the soil by the wind. Droplet
nuclei are dried residue of less than 5 microns in size. In contrast to droplets that fall to the ground
within a few feet, droplet nuclei may remain suspended in the air for long periods of time and may
be blown over great distances. Measles, for example, has occurred in children who came into a
physician’s office after a child with measles had left, because the measles virus remained
suspended in the air.
Vehicles that may indirectly transmit an infectious agent include food, water, biologic products
(blood), and fomites (inanimate objects such as handkerchiefs, bedding, or surgical scalpels). A
vehicle may passively carry a pathogen — as food or water may carry hepatitis A virus.
Alternatively, the vehicle may provide an environment in which the agent grows, multiplies, or
produces toxin — as improperly canned foods provide an environment that supports production of
botulinum toxin by Clostridiumbotulinum.
Vectors such as mosquitoes, fleas, and ticks may carry an infectious agent through purely
mechanical means or may support growth or changes in the agent. Examples of mechanical
transmission are flies carrying Shigella on their appendages and fleas carrying Yersinia pestis, the
causative agent of plague, in their gut. In contrast, in biologic transmission, the causative agent of
malaria or guinea worm disease undergoes maturation in an intermediate host
before it can be transmitted to humans.
Portal of entry
The portal of entry refers to the manner in which a pathogen enters a susceptible host. The portal of
entry must provide access to tissues in which the pathogen can multiply or a toxin can act.
Often, infectious agents use the same portal to enter a new host that they used to exit the source
host. For example, influenza virus exits the respiratory tract of the source host and enters the
respiratory tract of the new host. In contrast, many pathogens that cause gastroenteritis follow a so-
called “fecal-oral” route because they exit the source host in feces, are carried on inadequately
washed hands to a vehicle such as food, water, or utensil, and enter a new host through the mouth.
Other portals of entry include the skin (hookworm), mucous membranes (syphilis), and
blood(hepatitis B, human immunodeficiency virus).
Host
The final link in the chain of infection is a susceptible host. Susceptibility of a host depends on
genetic or constitutional factors, specific immunity, and nonspecific factors that affect an
individual’s ability to resist infection or to limit pathogenicity. An individual’s genetic makeup
may either increase or decrease susceptibility. For example, persons with sickle cell trait seem to be
38
at least partially protected from a particular type of malaria. Specific immunity refers to protective
antibodies that are directed against a specific agent. Such antibodies may develop in response to
infection, vaccine, or toxoid (toxin that has been deactivated but retains its capacity to stimulate
production of toxin antibodies) or may be acquired by transplacental transfer from mother to fetus
or by injection of antitoxin or immune globulin. Nonspecific factors that defend against infection
include the skin, mucous membranes, gastric acidity, cilia in the respiratory tract, the cough reflex,
and nonspecific immune response. Factors that may increase susceptibility to infection by
disrupting host defenses include malnutrition, alcoholism, and disease or therapy that impairs the
nonspecific immune response.
In this Lecture we have looked at Diseases causation.Having had enoyed this lecture answer the
following:-
LECTURE 3
LEVELS OF DISEASE PREVENTION
Lecture overview
The primary mandate in public health is prevention of diseases. This lecture looks at levels of
diseases prevention.
This has been a good lecture knowing how diseases are prevented which equips you to answer tha
following question:
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
LECTURE 4
Lecture Overview
Welcome to lecture four. In the previous lecture we looked at levels of disease prevention. If
diseases are not prevented, they may result into influx of community members suffering from
disease .This lecture will look at disease outbreak.
Activity 4.1
Define an outbreak.
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
Anyone about to embark on an outbreak investigation should be well prepared before leaving for
the field. Preparations can be grouped into three categories: (a) investigation, (b) administration,
and (c) consultation. Good preparation in all three categories will facilitate a smooth field
experience.
(a)Investigation
First, as a field investigator, you must have the appropriate scientific knowledge, supplies,
and equipment to carry out the investigation. You should discuss the situation with
someone knowledgeable about the disease and about field investigations, and review the
applicable literature. You should assemble useful references such as journal articles and
sample questionnaires. Before leaving for a field investigation, consult laboratory staff to
ensure that you take the proper laboratory material and know the proper collection, storage,
and transportation techniques. Arrange for a portable computer, tape recorder, camera, and
othersupplies.
(b) Administration
55
Second, as an investigator, you must pay attention to administrative procedures. You may
need to take care of personal matters before you leave, especially if the investigation is
likely to be lengthy.
LECTURE 5
SCREENING POPULATION
Lecture Overview
The aim of screening for a disease is to reduce the burden of the disease, mortality and morbidity
in the community. Screening does not guarantee that disease will not occur, or if it occurs, that it
can be cured.
Screening involves a test being offered to all individuals in an eligible group, usually defined by
age, as part of an organised program. The group is eligible because there is strong scientific
evidence that they are at most risk and will get the most health benefit from screening. No
screening test is 100 per cent accurate .For a screening program to succeed there must be evidence
that early diagnosis and treatment increases the chance of successfully treating or managing the
disease.
Population screening is planned and coordinated with the aim of bringing maximum health benefits
to the community, with a focus on equity of access and health outcomes.
iDefine screening.
Condition
•The condition should be a significant health problem
•There should be a recognisable or early symptomatic stage.
•The natural history of the condition, including development from latent to declared disease should
be adequately understood.
Test
•There should be a suitable test
•The test should be acceptable to the population
Treatment
Screening program
•Case finding should be a continuing process and not a 'once and for all' project
It is important to distinguish between population-based screening and opportunistic case-finding.
Population-based screening is where a test of offered systematically to all individuals in the defined
target group within the framework of agreed policy, protocols, quality management monitoring and
evaluation.
PURPOSE OF SCREENING
Congratulations .You have successfully completed this lecture on population screening where you
have defined screening,principles of screening,purpose of csrening and its process.This knowledge
has equipped you to answer the following:-
LECTURE 6
Lecture Overview
MEASURES OF DISEASE
Features
�Universal coverage of the population
�Continuous operation
Death Registration:
60
This is an official notification that a death has occurred usually a legal requirement before
burial/cremation. Counts (rates) by age, sex, location and time provide invaluable health data.
Concurrent registration is essential for good cause of death determination .
Measures of Mortality
�LDCswith very young populations will often have lower CDRsthan MDCseven though their
overall health conditions are poorer .
LIFE EXPECTANCY
This is the estimate of the average number of additional years a person could expect ti live if the
age-specific death rates for a given year prevailed for the rest of his or her life.
MATERNAL MORTALITY
This is the death of woman while pregnant or within 42 days of termination of pregnancyor from
any caouse related to,or aggravated by the pregnancy or its management.
No of live births
With the following formulas you should be in a position to calculate any mortality and morbidity
rates.
MORBIDITY
Morbidity refers to the diseases and illness, injuries, and disabilities in a population.
Data on frequency and distribution of a illness can aid in controlling its spread and, in some cases,
may lead to the identification of its causes.
The major methods for gathering morbidity data are through surveillance systems and sample
surveys which are both costly procedures and therefore are used only selectively in developing
country setting to gather data on health problems of major importance
Morbidity -Indicators
Incidence Rate-Number of persons contracting a disease during a given time period per 1000
population at risk.
-Refers only to new cases during a defined period.
Example
Incidence for malaria will be given by: No of persons developing malaria during a given time
period divided by population at risk multiplied by constant(k)
Prevelance rate- Number of persons who have a particular disease/condition at a given point in
time per 1,000 population. A Snapshot of an existing health situation and Includes all known cases
of a disease that have not resulted in death, cure or remission
63
Congratulation you are done with this interesting lecture.We have discussed different mortality
tates and ratios,sources of mortality information and challenges of vital registration in developing
countries.
LECTURE 7
MEASURES OF ASSOCIATION
RISKS
Risk can be defined as the probability of an event.( such as developing a disease )occurring.
RELATIVE RISK
I s the probability of an event (developing a disease)occurring in the exposed people compared to
the probability of an event in non exposed people or as the ratio of the two probabilities.
1.If the relative risk is equal to 1,the numerator equals the denominator and the risk in exposed
persons equals the risk in non exposed persons hence NO evidence exists for any increased risk
in exposed individuals or for any association of the disease with the exposure in question.
2.If the risk is greater than1, the numerator is greater than the denominator and the risk in the
exposed is greater than the risk in non exposed persons. This is evidence of a positive
association and may be causal.
3.If the relative risk is less than 1,the numerator is less than the denominator, and the risk in
exposed persons is less than the risk in non exposed persons. This is an evidence of a negative
66
RR=Incidence in exposed
Incidence in non xposed
=28.0/17.4
1.61
Hence there is evidence that smoking cigarette is associated with coronary heart disease.
Activity 7.1
ODDS RATIO
Is the ratio of the no.of ways the event can occur to the number of ways the event cannot occur.
Odds=probabilitity
1-pobability
=P/1-P
EXAMPLE
Suppose we are betting on a horse(Epi beauty) which has a 60%probability of winning the race(P)
Epi has a40% probability oflosing(1-P)
67
Odds=P/1-P
=60%/40%
=1.5 winning.
Calculate the
i. Relative Risk
ii. Odds Ratio
Relative Risk=200/10,000
100/10,000
=2
Activity 7.2
Odds Ratio=200*9900
100*9800
=2.02
68
Congratulation for going through lecture 7.We have discussed relative risks and odds ratio and
their applications in Epidemilogy.
From the table below calculate the Relative Risk and Odds Ratio respectively.
. Sauvaget C, Nagano J, Allen N, et al. Intake of animal products and stroke mortality in the
Hiroshima/Nagasaki Life Span Study. International Journal of Epidemiology. 2003;32:536–543.
Last JM, ed., et al. A Dictionary of Epidemiology. 4th ed. New York: Oxford University Press;
2000.
Gordis L, Epidemiology. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 1996.
69
LECTURE 8
MEASURES OF ASSOCIATION
Lecture overview
Many diseases are caused by more than one exposure. For example, lung cancer is caused by
exposure to smoking, asbestos, radiation or some chemical products. Public health programs to
prevent disease are directed toward reducing or eliminating such causal exposures.
Epidemiologic research not only focuses on the identification and assessment of risk factors but
also is concerned with planning and evaluating public health interventions or control measures
to reduce the incidence of disease in the population. Being able to predict the impact of remov-
ing a particular exposure on the risk of developing a disease is an important public health con-
sideration. It allows those who are responsible for protecting the public’s health to make deci-
sions about allocating scarce resources (time, energy, money and political capital) where they
will have the most impact. It helps them answer the following questions:
2. By what percent would the risk of developing disease be reduced if the exposure were
eliminated?
70
If smoking were eliminated, what would happen to the incidence of lung cancer? Would smokers’
risk of lung cancer disappear if they stopped smoking?
For public health decision-making purposes, it is valuable to be able to answer these questions
from two perspectives: from the perspective of the impact of eliminating the exposure on only
those who are exposed and from the perspective of the impact of eliminating the exposure on
the entire population, those who are exposed and those who are not exposed.
Note that for purposes of this teaching unit risk and incidence rate (or incidence) can be
considered interchangeable. Strictly speaking, however, incidence rate (or incidence) denotes
the rate of new cases per unit time whereas risk denotes the rate of new cases in a fixed interval
of time.
Attributable risk (AR): AR is the portion of the incidence of a disease in the exposed that is
due to the exposure. It is the incidence of a disease in the exposed that would be eliminated if
exposure were eliminated.
71
The AR is calculated by subtracting the incidence in the unexposed (Iu) from the incidence in the
exposed (Ie):
AR = Ie − Iu
Attributable risk percent (AR%): AR% is the percent of the incidence of a disease in the
exposed that is due to the exposure. It is the proportion of the incidence of a disease in the
exposed that would be eliminated if exposure were eliminated.
The AR% is calculated by dividing the attributable risk (AR) by the incidence in the exposed (Ie)
and then multiplying the product times 100 to obtain a percentage:
Ie − I
AR% = × 100
u
Ie
or
AR
AR% = × 100
Ie
Population attributable risk (PAR): PAR is the portion of the incidence of a disease in the pop-
ulation (exposed and nonexposed) that is due to exposure. It is the incidence of a disease in the
population that would be eliminated if exposure were eliminated.
The PAR is calculated by subtracting the incidence in the unexposed (Iu) from the incidence in
total population (exposed and unexposed) (Ip):
PAR = Ip − Iu
Population attributable risk percent (PAR%): PAR% is the percent of the incidence of a dis-
ease in the population (exposed and nonexposed) that is due to exposure. It is the percent of
the incidence of a disease in the population that would be eliminated if exposure were eliminated.
The PAR% is calculated by dividing the population attributable risk (PAR) by the incidence in the
total population and then multiplying the product times 100 to obtain a percentage:
Ip − I
PAR% = × 100
u
Ip
or
PAR
PAR% = × 100
Ip
72
Example
The preventive advantages of eating fish have been reported in numerous studies. A recent
cohort study1 reported that not eating fish increased the risk for stroke. The table below
shows the results of this study:
Cases Noncases
Eating Fish of Stroke of Stroke Total
Never 82 (a) 1,549 (b) 1,631
Almost daily 23 (c) 779 (d) 802
Total 105 2,328 2,433
Incidence in the exposed (Ie): a/a b 82/1,631 0.0503, or 5.03 per 100
Incidence in the unexposed (Iu): c/c d 23/802 0.0287, or 2.87 per 100
Incidence in both combined (Ip): a c/(a b c d) 105/2,433
0.0432, or 4.32 per 100
Incidence in the exposed a/a + b
RR = =
Incidence in the unexposed c /c + d
a(c + d )
RR = = 5.03/2.87 = 1.75
c (a + b)
Applying the formulas above to these data (and disregarding the fact that some members of the
population may eat fish more than “never” and less than “almost daily”) results in the following
measures of attributable risk.
• Those who never eat fish have 1.75 times as much risk (higher incidence) as those who eat
73
• If those who do not eat fish change their eating habits and begin to eat fish
almost daily, their incidence of strokes will decrease by 2.16 per 100
individuals (AR = 2.16 per 100), which would represent a 43% reduction of
their stroke incidence (AR% = 43%).
• A reduction of 1.45 new cases of stroke per 100 population (exposed and
unexposed) is expected if everybody eats fish almost daily (PAR = 1.45 per
100). Such reduction represents a 33.6% reduction of the incidence in the
population (PAR% = 33.6%).
!
With the following formulas you should be in a position to calculate any Attributable
risks.
You have come to the end of another lecture where we discussed about
definition ,calculations and applications of attributable risk.
Last JM, ed., et al. A Dictionary of Epidemiology. 4th ed. New York: Oxford
University Press; 2000.
Gordis L, Epidemiology. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 1996.
75
LECTURE 9
SAMPLING METHODS
Lecture Overview
1.Define sampling.
Activity
Specifying a sampling method for selecting items or events from the frame
Determining the sample size
Implementing the sampling plan
Sampling and data collecting
Population definition
we might study records from people born in 2008 in order to make predictions
about people born in 2009.
Time spent in making the sampled population and population of concern precise is
often well spent, because it raises many issues, ambiguities and questions that would
otherwise have been overlooked at this stage.
Sampling frame
In the most straightforward case, such as the sentencing of a batch of material from
production (acceptance sampling by lots), it is possible to identify and measure every
single item in the population and to include any one of them in our sample. However,
in the more general case this is not possible. There is no way to identify all rats in the
set of all rats. Where voting is not compulsory, there is no way to identify which
people will actually vote at a forthcoming election (in advance of the election). These
imprecise populations are not amenable to sampling in any of the ways below and to
which we could apply statistical theory.
As a remedy, we seek a sampling frame which has the property that we can identify
every single element and include any in our sample. The most straightforward type of
frame is a list of elements of the population (preferably the entire population) with
appropriate contact information. For example, in an opinion poll, possible sampling
frames include an electoral register and a telephone directory.
A probability sampling is one in which every unit in the population has a chance
(greater than zero) of being selected in the sample, and this probability can be
accurately determined. The combination of these traits makes it possible to produce
unbiased estimates of population totals, by weighting sampled units according to their
probability of selection.
Example: We want to estimate the total income of adults living in a given street. We
visit each household in that street, identify all adults living there, and randomly select
one adult from each household. (For example, we can allocate each person a random
number, generated from a uniform distribution between 0 and 1, and select the person
with the highest number in each household). We then interview the selected person
and find their income. People living on their own are certain to be selected, so we
simply add their income to our estimate of the total. But a person living in a
household of two adults has only a one-in-two chance of selection. To reflect this,
when we come to such a household, we would count the selected person's income
twice towards the total. (The person who is selected from that household can be
loosely viewed as also representing the person who isn't selected.)
In the above example, not everybody has the same probability of selection; what
makes it a probability sample is the fact that each person's probability is known. When
every element in the population does have the same probability of selection, this is
known as an 'equal probability of selection' (EPS) design. Such designs are also
referred to as 'self-weighting' because all sampled units are given the same weight.
78
Non probability sampling is any sampling method where some elements of the
population have no chance of selection (these are sometimes referred to as 'out of
coverage'/'undercovered'), or where the probability of selection can't be accurately
determined. It involves the selection of elements based on assumptions regarding the
population of interest, which forms the criteria for selection. Hence, because the
selection of elements is nonrandom, nonprobability sampling does not allow the
estimation of sampling errors. These conditions give rise to exclusion bias, placing
limits on how much information a sample can provide about the population.
Information about the relationship between sample and population is limited, making
it difficult to extrapolate from the sample to the population.
Example: We visit every household in a given street, and interview the first person to
answer the door. In any household with more than one occupant, this is a
nonprobability sample, because some people are more likely to answer the door (e.g.
an unemployed person who spends most of their time at home is more likely to answer
than an employed housemate who might be at work when the interviewer calls) and
it's not practical to calculate these probabilities
accidental sampling,
quota sampling and
purposive sampling. In addition, nonresponse effects may turn any probability
design into a nonprobability design if the characteristics of nonresponse are
not well understood, since nonresponse effectively modifies each element's
probability of being sampled.
Sampling methods
Within any of the types of frame identified above, a variety of sampling methods can
be employed, individually or in combination. Factors commonly influencing the
choice between these designs include:
In a simple random sample (SRS) of a given size, all such subsets of the frame
are given an equal probability. Each element of the frame thus has an equal
probability of selection: the frame is not subdivided or partitioned.
Furthermore, any given pair of elements has the same chance of selection as
any other such pair (and similarly for triples, and so on).
This minimises bias and simplifies analysis of results. In particular, the
variance between individual results within the sample is a good indicator of
variance in the overall population, which makes it relatively easy to estimate
the accuracy of results.
However, SRS can be vulnerable to sampling error because the randomness of
the selection may result in a sample that doesn't reflect the makeup of the
population.
For instance, a simple random sample of ten people from a given country will
on average produce five men and five women, but any given trial is likely to
overrepresent one sex and under represent the other. Systematic and stratified
techniques, discussed below, attempt to overcome this problem by using
information about the population to choose a more representative sample.
SRS may also be cumbersome and tedious when sampling from an unusually
large target population. In some cases, investigators are interested in research
questions specific to subgroups of the population. For example, researchers
might be interested in examining whether cognitive ability as a predictor of job
performance is equally applicable across racial groups.
SRS cannot accommodate the needs of researchers in this situation because it
does not provide subsamples of the population. Stratified sampling, which is
discussed below, addresses this weakness of SRS.
Simple random sampling is always an EPS design (equal probability of
selection), but not all EPS designs are simple random sampling.
Systematic sampling
Where the population embraces a number of distinct categories, the frame can
be organized by these categories into separate "strata."
Each stratum is then sampled as an independent sub-population, out of which
individual elements can be randomly selected.
There are several potential benefits to stratified sampling.
o Third, it is sometimes the case that data are more readily available for
individual, pre-existing strata within a population than for the overall
population; in such cases, using a stratified sampling approach may be
more convenient than aggregating data across groups (though this may
potentially be at odds with the previously noted importance of utilizing
criterion-relevant strata).
o Finally, since each stratum is treated as an independent population,
different sampling approaches can be applied to different strata,
potentially enabling researchers to use the approach best suited (or
most cost-effective) for each identified subgroup within the population.
There are, however, some potential drawbacks to using stratified sampling.
Disadvantages
Poststratification
Stratification is sometimes introduced after the sampling phase in a process
called "poststratification".
This approach is typically implemented due to a lack of prior knowledge of an
appropriate stratifying variable or when the experimenter lacks the necessary
information to create a stratifying variable during the sampling phase.
82
Probability-proportional-to-size sampling
The PPS approach can improve accuracy for a given sample size by
concentrating sample on large elements that have the greatest impact on
population estimates.
PPS sampling is commonly used for surveys of businesses, where element size
varies greatly and auxiliary information is often available - for instance, a
survey attempting to measure the number of guest-nights spent in hotels might
use each hotel's number of rooms as an auxiliary variable.
In some cases, an older measurement of the variable of interest can be used as
an auxiliary variable when attempting to produce more current estimates.
Cluster sampling
83
Quota sampling
For example interviewers might be tempted to interview those who look most
helpful. The problem is that these samples may be biased because not
everyone gets a chance of selection. This random element is its greatest
weakness and quota versus probability has been a matter of controversy for
many years.
Accidental sampling
1. Are there controls within the research design or experiment which can serve to
lessen the impact of a non-random convenience sample, thereby ensuring the
results will be more representative of the population?
2. Is there good reason to believe that a particular convenience sample would or
should respond or behave differently than a random sample from the same
population?
3. Is the question being asked by the research one that can adequately be
answered using a convenience sample?
Line-intercept sampling
Panel sampling
Therefore, each participant is interviewed at two or more time points; each period of
data collection is called a "wave". The method was developed by sociologist Paul
Lazarsfeld in 1938 as a means of studying political campaigns.
Sampling errors and biases are induced by the sample design. They include:
1. Selection bias: When the true selection probabilities differ from those
assumed in calculating the results.
2. Random sampling error: Random variation in the results due to the elements
in the sample being selected at random.
Non-sampling error
Non-sampling errors are other errors which can impact the final survey estimates,
caused by problems in data collection, processing, or sample design. They include:
After sampling, a review should be held of the exact process followed in sampling,
rather than that intended, in order to study any effects that any divergences might have
on subsequent analysis.
In survey sampling, many of the individuals identified as part of the sample may be
unwilling to participate, not have the time to participate (opportunity cost), or survey
administrators may not have been able to contact them. In this case, there is a risk of
differences, between respondents and nonrespondents, leading to biased estimates of
population parameters. This is often addressed by improving survey design, offering
incentives, and conducting follow-up studies which make a repeated attempt to
contact the unresponsive and to characterize their similarities and differences with the
rest of the frame. The effects can also be mitigated by weighting the data when
86
Well done ,you are done with this lecture. We discussed about the sampling methods
and non sampling methods
LECTURE 9
Lecture Overview
Ethical issues can facilitate the effective planning, implementation, and growth of a
variety of public health programs and research activities. Public health ethics is
consistent with the prevention orientation of public health. Ethical concerns can be
anticipated or identified early and effectively addressed through careful analysis and
consultation.We will discuss the ethical issues in Epidemiology.
Activity 9.1
What is Ethics?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
ETHICAL PRINCPLES
1.Beneficence
2. Nonmaleficence
3.Justice
Practical problems in public health ethics require that these principles be made more
applicable through a process of specification and reform.
The ethical principle of beneficence requires that potential benefits to individuals and
to society be maximized and that potential harms be minimized . Beneficence
involves both the protection of individual welfare and the promotion of the common
welfare. This principle underlies ethical rules and norms that require that public health
institutions act in a timely manner on the information they have and that they
expeditiously make the information available to the public .
The principle of nonmaleficence requires that harmful acts be avoided. However, the
principle of nonmaleficence does not preclude balancing potential harms against
potential benefits .
The principle of autonomy focuses on the right of self-determination. Respect for the
individual which grants importance to individual freedom in political life, and to
personal development.
Specific ethical issues arising in epidemiologic research and public health practice
that have been highlighted in ethics guidelines include minimizing risks and providing
benefits, informed consent, avoiding and disclosing conflicts of interest, obligations to
communities, and the institutional review board system.
Such risks and potential harms can be minimized by careful attention to study
procedures and questionnaire design, for example, by limiting the length of interviews
or by scheduling them on a date that is less likely to result in adverse psychological
effects.
Minimizing risks and potential harms and maximizing potential benefits are
particularly important in epidemiologic studies of vulnerable populations. Examples
89
include studies of children, prisoners, some elderly people, and populations that are
marginalized or socioeconomically disadvantaged.
A further obligation is the need to ensure that the burdens and potential benefits of
epidemiologic studies are distributed equitably. The potential benefits of
epidemiologic research are often societal in nature, such as obtaining new information
about the causes of diseases, or identifying health disparities across groups defined by
race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, or other factors. Research participants may
receive direct benefits from participation in some studies, such as when a previously
unrecognized disease or risk factor is detected during examinations. The balance of
risks and potential benefits of epidemiologic studies are considered not only by
individual researchers but also by members of human subjects .
Other ethical issues that arise in the professional practice of epidemiology relate to
how best to deal with potential conflicts of interest, in order to maintain public trust in
epidemiology and sustain public support for health research.. Conflicts of interest can
affect scientific judgment and harm scientific objectivity. Studies have suggested that
financial interests and researchers' commitment to a hypothesis can influence reported
research results . To address such concerns, funding agencies and research institutions
have taken steps such as adopting new training programs that encourage researchers to
avoid or disclose conflicts of interest, and revising or strengthening institutional rules
and guidelines. Researchers should disclose financial interests and sources of funding
when publishing research results. It may also be important to disclose information
about potential or actual financial conflicts of interest when obtaining informed
consent from research participants. A related issue is that health researchers should
avoid entering into contractual agreements that prevent them from publishing results
in a timely manner . Communicating research results in a timely manner, without
censorship or interference from the funder, is essential for maintaining public trust .
Obligations to communities
Informed consent
Informed consent provisions in public health studies ensure that research participants
make a free choice and also give institutions the legal authorization to proceed with
the research Investigators must disclose information that potential participants use to
decide whether to consent to the study. This includes the purpose of the research, the
scientific procedures, anticipated risks and benefits, any inconveniences or
discomfort, and the participant's right to refuse participation or to withdraw from the
research at any time.
90
One important way in which public health researchers reduce potential harms and
risks to participants in epidemiologic studies is by rigorously protecting the
confidentiality of their health information. Specific measures taken by researchers to
protect the confidentiality of health information include keeping records under lock
and key, limiting access to confidential records, discarding personal identifiers from
data collection forms and computer files whenever feasible, and training staff in the
importance of privacy and confidentiality protection .
Other measures that have been employed to safeguard health information include
encrypting computer databases, limiting geographic detail, and suppressing cells in
tabulated data where the number of cases in the cell is small .
Lappe M. Ethics and public health. In: Last JM, editor. Maxcy-Rosenau's public
health and preventive medicine. 12. Norwalk, CT: Appleton-Century
91
92
LECTURE 10
EPIDEMIOLOGICAL STUDIES
Lecture overview
Descriptive survey
The most important way of classifying the epidemiological studies is the one which
accounts for the role/control of the researcher over the study. According to this, a
major distinction is being made of: a) observational studies, and b) experiments.
Observational studies
• The investigator observes the occurrence of the condition/disease in population
groups that have assigned themselves to a certain exposure.
• Often most practical and feasible to conduct.
• Carried out in more natural settings – representative of the target population.
• Often, there is little control over the study situation – results are susceptible to
distorting influences.
Experimental approach
• The most powerful study design for testing ethiological hypothesis.
• The investigator exercises control over the allocation of exposure, its
associated factors and observation of the outcome.
• For obvious ethical and practical reasons, the possibilities of conducting
experiments in human populations are very limited.
Disease
Exposed
No disease
People without
Population the disease
“at risk”
Disease
Not exposed
No disease
96
An alternative strategy to the costly and time consuming prospective cohort design is
the historical cohort study. A cohort is identified (enumerated) as of some historical
point in time and is then followed over past time to the present. Disease rates and
relative risk (RR) can be derived from this type of study as well. The retrospective
97
Exposed
Cases
Not exposed
Population
Exposed
Controls
Not exposed
TIME
99
The case-control study begins with a group of cases of a specific disease. This (the disease) is the starting
point of the study, unlike cohort studies where the interest is in drawing a contrast between exposed and
non-exposed subjects. So, the case-control approach is directed at the prior exposures, which caused the
disease and thus proceeds from effect (outcome) to cause (exposure).
Advantages of case-control studies
1. Highly informative compared to other designs: several exposures or potential causal agents can be
examined.
2. Efficient designs (low cost per study) primarily because few subjects are needed to obtain stable
estimate of RR.
3. Particularly appropriate for studies of rare diseases (e.g. a case-control study with 100 cases of a
disease having an annual incidence of 1/1000. A cohort design for this disease would require 1000
persons to be followed up for 100 years or 10000 persons to be followed up for 10 years in order to
yield the same number of cases).
Disadvantages of case-control studies
1. The absolute frequency of a disease can not be determined. No counts are made of population at-
risk, thus there are no denominators available to obtain the incidence rates. Lacking absolute risks, it’s
not possible to compare disease rates among different studies, nor is it possible to estimate the
attributable risk.
2. Particularly subject to bias: selection bias in choosing controls and recall bias (cases may recall
better prior exposures than controls).
3. “Philosophically” difficult to interpret: the antecedent-consequent relationship (exposure-outcome)
is subject to considerable uncertainty.
100
Congratulations for successfully completeing this lecture.We have looked at types of epidemiological
studies ,cohort and case-control studies.
LECTURE 11
EPIDEMIOLOGICAL STUDIES
CROSS SECTIONAL STUDY DESIGN
Population
Congratulations for successfully completing this lectur which we have discussed cross
sectional studies.
105
5. Kleinbaum DG, Kupper LL, Morgenstern H. (1992). Epidemiologic research: principles and
quantitative methods. Lifetime Learning Publications, Belmont, California.
6. Abramson JH, Feinleib M, Detels R, Greenberg RS, Ibrahim MA. Oxford Textbook of Public
Health. (1985) vol 3: investigative methods in public health. Oxford University Press, Oxford.