Scribd
Upload
46 views2 pages

Study Designs in Epidemiology Explained

This document summarizes and compares different study designs used in epidemiology including cross-sectional studies, cohort studies, case-control studies, experimental studies, and ecological studies. It lists the advantages and disadvantages of each design. For example, it notes that cross-sectional studies are less costly and can determine disease prevalence but cannot establish temporal sequence, while cohort studies directly estimate risks but are expensive and time-consuming.

Uploaded by

Sael Rodriguez
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
46 views2 pages

Study Designs in Epidemiology Explained

This document summarizes and compares different study designs used in epidemiology including cross-sectional studies, cohort studies, case-control studies, experimental studies, and ecological studies. It lists the advantages and disadvantages of each design. For example, it notes that cross-sectional studies are less costly and can determine disease prevalence but cannot establish temporal sequence, while cohort studies directly estimate risks but are expensive and time-consuming.

Uploaded by

Sael Rodriguez
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Castillo, MH; Celis, MJL; Rodriguez, S Submitted: October 01, 2018

Section 2 Group 3

PH 180 (Epidemiology)
Laboratory Exercise 5
Characterizing Study Designs

Study Design Advantages Disadvantages


Cross-sectional Study • Less costly and time to • No temporal sequence
conduct between exposure and
• Determines the magnitude of outcomes
disease or disease prevalence • No direct estimates proxy for
• Good for multiple exposure risk or rate ratio
• Good for multiple outcomes • Inefficient for rare outcomes
• Use of group level data • Migration can bias
• Useful for establishing interpretation of data
baseline data • Influenced by rate
• Useful for evaluating impact (incidence) and duration of
of community level health outcomes
intervention
• Odds ratio provides estimate
of risk or rate ratio
Cohort Study • Good for rare exposure • Expensive and time
• Good for multiple outcomes consuming
• Directly estimates risks and • Inefficient for rare outcomes
rates • Loss to follow up
• Provides temporality
between exposure and
outcomes
• Maximize exposure
differences among
communities
• Use of group level data
Case-Control Study • Good for rare outcomes • Not good for rare exposures
• Less costly and time to • No direct estimates proxy for
conduct risk or rate ratio
• Use for disease with long • Problem in external
induction and latent period validity and
generalizability
Experimental Study • Use to test new drug or • Expensive and time
medical treatment consuming
• Random allocation of subject • Ethical consideration is
• Strongest evidence of strongest
causality or causal inference • Results cannot be
generalized to individual
• Problems in external validity
and generalizability
Ecologic Study • Use of group level data • Results cannot be
• Useful for evaluating impact generalized to individual
of community level • No direct estimates proxy for
intervention risk or rate ratio
• Less costly and time to • Migration can bias
conduct interpretation of data
• Random allocation of • No temporal sequence
subjects between exposure and
outcomes

You might also like