a critical review of a published epidemiology research study

a critical review of a published epidemiology research study – This assignment is a critical review of a published epidemiology research study.  Please select a published epidemiologic paper and prepare a critical review.   Examples are posted for your reference, please use them along with the Rubric.

In choosing the published paper for this assignment, try to find one that involves a health problem, issue or topic that interests you – preferably, a topic for which you have some background knowledge from previous reading or experience.  The paper should be drawn from a cohort or case-control study, since these designs are those that are most often used for rigorous testing of hypotheses.  It would be best if the paper focuses on measure that have been covered in class (relative risk, odds ratio).  Clinical studies of disease prognosis should be avoided.

Use the outline attached as guidance in developing and presenting your review.  Remember the outline is only a model and you should not feel compelled to cover every item, especially if certain parts do not apply to your study or if you think they are irrelevant.

Strive for objectivity in your critique.  Remember that no single study is perfect for identifying a risk factor.  Therefore, if you claim there is a potential bias, be specific about how the bias might have occurred and speculate (if reasonable) as to the magnitude or direction of the error, in particular noting whether or not the major conclusions might have been affected.  In all elements of your review, be sure to acknowledge to the extent to which the authors seem to have been aware of the potential sources of error as well as their assessment of the problems in interpretation that the error would cause.

1. Briefly describe the study and central results as presented by the authors
   1. Major hypothesis being tested and possibly the rationale or justification for conducting the study
   2. The methods employed to test the hypothesis including (but not necessarily limited to) the type of study, source population for study subjects, method of selecting subjects and collecting data about them (with particular emphasis on the key variables used in the analyses).
   3. The principle methods of analysis and results
   4. The most important conclusion including the interpretation of the results, limitations of the finds and implications for future research or public health / occupational health practice.
2. Critique the paper: a review of strengths, weaknesses, flaws
   1. Inappropriate analytic methods for testing the hypothesis
   2. Temporal ambiguity between the exposure and the health outcomes
   3. Potential sources of bias, information bias and or uncontrolled confounding, and the possible implication for the results of the study.  Note if the authors present an argument for having minimized one or more potential sources of bias.  Similarly, if there are potential sources of error that were not acknowledged by the authors, identify them.
   4. Hypothesis, methods, results have been poorly presented
   5. Inconsistent findings within the study population not adequately explained or explored.
   6. If the findings are incoherent with our current state of knowledge about the pathogenesis of the disease, is this fact obscured or inadequately addressed?
   7. Limited generalizations of the findings for practical purposes or inappropriate generalization by the authors.
   8. The author’s conclusions are not justified by their findings
3. Your conclusions and recommendations
   1. What contribution, if any, does this study provide?  (Did the study accomplish its goal).
   2. What specific improvements could be made?
   3. What, if any, are the clinical, personal or policy implications of this research

These are the eight rubics areas to follow while critique the article

1. Problem and Purpose
2. Hypothesis
3. Review of Literature
4. Methodology
5. Sample and Generalizability to Population
6. Discussion and Results
7. References
8. General overall analysis of the study or article

a critical review of a published epidemiology research study

Critical Review: Case-Control Study on the Prevention of Occupational Eye Injuries

Study Description

As a health and safety professional, one always wants to ensure that one of the most important organs, the eyes, are always protected and never get injured. If an employee’s eyes get injured, it can result in a permanent vision loss. Wearing safety glasses can protect an employee’s eyes in the event of accident. However easy it may appear to wear safety glasses, employees tend to not want to wear safety glasses for many different reasons. So, how do we get employees to continuously wear their safety glasses and what factors distinguish good safety glasses wearing employees from bad safety glasses wearing employees. In the study conducted by Chi-Kung Ho et al., the researches set out to find what factors exist that make some employees more susceptible to eye occupational eye injuries and what factors exist to prevent occupational eye injuries.

Chi-Kung Ho et al., performed a case-study in Taiwan to analyze the differences among workers on their knowledge, attitude to practice, of occupational accident prevention. Cases of work- related eye injuries were compared to controls. The cases and controls completed a questionnaire which displayed that 80.6% and 62.7% of workers in the case and control groups did not wear eye protection during work.

The factors that distinguished the occurrence of occupational eye injuries for employees was found to be temporary employment, fewer than 10 years of education, poor management of industrial health and safety in the workplace, and poor attitude towards accident prevention. Thus, based on these findings, in order to prevent occupational eye injuries, workplaces should focus on addressing the risk factors above.