Question

The following table, (Table 2) shows numbers of children with anemia and parasitaemia according to net ownership for all three surveys.

Table2:

	Number (%) of children
	With anemia	With parasitaemia	Total
No net	103 (54%)	132 (70%)	189
Untreated net	90 (39%)	115 (49%)	233
Treated net	70 (21%)	120 (37%)	326
	263	367

Q5: What is the prevalence ratio for the effect of owning a treated net on the prevalence of anemia? (2pts)

Q6: What is the prevalence ratio for the effect of not owning a net (whether treated or untreated) on the prevalence of parasitaemia? (2pts)

Q7: It has been asserted that the best observational design option for investigating an epidemiologic hypothesis is the prospective cohort study. Explain why you agree or disagree with this statement. (2pts)

Q8: Recently, findings have been reported from a perspective cohort study that demonstrated a significant positive association between coffee consumption and increased risk of coronary heart disease. Specifically, the authors reported a 2.5 fold increased risk among those drinking five (5) or more cups of coffee daily, with a 95% confidence interval from 1.08 – 5.77, and P-value =0.006.

Based on this data, the public health recommendation was made that people limit their coffee consumption to two (2) cups or less per day.

On what basis do you agree or disagree with this recommendation? (2pts)

Answer 1

Q5;patient with anemia(treated)=70,total number of patient with anemia=263 . patient treated with anemia =70,total number of treated=326 so the PR=(70/(70+263))/(70/(70+326)=.840 Q6patient with parasitaemia=132,total =367 patient with no net=132 total=189 so the PR=1.55 Q7;

Cohort studies are a form of longitudinal study design that flows from the exposure to outcome. This section outlines the challenges in designing such studies, their analysis, and interpretation of outcomes.

This section also covers:

1. Issues in the design of cohort studies
2. Potential bias in cohort studies
3. Analysis of cohort studies
4. Strengths and weaknesses of cohort studies 5. It is very easier to verify also 6.The "What will happen to me?" study follows a group of healthy people with different levels of exposure and assesses what happens to their health over time. It is a desirable design because exposure precedes the health outcome — a condition necessary for causation — and is less subject to bias because exposure is evaluated before the health status is known .so i agree with this statement Q8;When the consumption of coffee decreased by 2 cups ,the p value also decreases.the intrval also increses when the quantity decreases