Question

5. Question 5 is based on the following abstract: Objectives. This study aimed to clarify the relationship between community water fluoridation (CWF) and intelligence (IQ) in New Zealand. Methods. We conducted a study of a general population sample of those born in Dunedin, New Zealand, between April 1, 1972, and March 30, 1973 (95.4% retention after 38 years of follow- up). Residence in a CWF area, use of fluoride dentifrice and intake of 0.5-milligram fluoride tablets were assessed in early life (prior to age 5 years); we assessed IQ repeatedly between ages 7 to 13 years and at age 38 years. Results. No clear differences in IQ because of fluoride exposure were noted. These findings held after adjusting for potential confounding variables, including sex, socioeconomic status, breastfeeding, and birth weight (as well as educational attainment for adult IQ outcomes). Conclusions. These findings do not support the assertion that fluoride in the context of CWF programs is neurotoxic. Associations between very high fluoride exposure and low IQ reported in previous studies may have been affected by confounding, particularly by urban or rural status. Which epidemiologic study design is described above? (Select one) a. Prospective cohort study b. Case-control study c. Cross-sectional study d. Clinical trial e. Ecological study.

Answer 1

Answer: Prospective cohort study

( The epidemiologic study design that is described in above mentioned case is the prospective cohort study. This is because this study includes the research for a particular group which mainly differs from the various factors in the study. This study identify the factors which affects the outcome rates. )