In this activity, you will connect with and learn from a health specialist, public health practitioner, or public health researcher that uses epidemiology in his/her work to gain a better understanding of the role of epidemiology in public health.

Step 4: Review your work by asking yourself the questions listed below and then revise your document accordingly before final submission to ensure you capture the self-evaluation questions:

1. Have  I provided a brief summary of my interviewee, as well as a description of my interviewee's current area of work?
2. Did I write a detailed summary of my interview with a key informant (a health specialist, public health practitioner, or researcher that uses epidemiology in his/her work)?
3. Have I discussed the role and significance of epidemiology in public health in my own words, demonstrating a clear understanding?
4. Did my assignment contain 750-850 words?
5. After self-review and necessary revisions, confirm that your assignment is complete and well-articulated, and then submit the final version.

Step 5: Submit your assignment by clicking “add a new discussion topic” below and completing the fields.

OPTIONAL Step 6: Interact (10 minutes)

If you would like to, you can reply to your peers' posts in a respectful and professional manner. Ensure that your post engages your peers' ideas by including a reflection on their comments, sharing ideas of other potential difficulties and parties involved, or asking thought-provoking questions. If a peer comments on your posting, please reply. To post a reply, click “Reply” on a particular discussion, write your feedback and then click on “Post to forum.”

Why is epidemiology often described as “the basic science of public health?”

Step 4: Review your work by asking yourself the questions listed below and then revise your document accordingly before final submission to ensure you capture the self-evaluation questions:

1. Have I selected and discussed 5 health indicators, making sure to include one related to an infectious disease, one related to a non-communicable disease, and one related to mortality?
2. Have I identified and written about possible limitations for each health indicator?
3. Have I discussed how national health indicator data can be applied to public health policy or programming, using my own words and understanding?
4. Is my assignment within the word limit, containing a minimum of 200 and a maximum of 400 words?

Use these questions as a guide to critically evaluate your own work, ensuring that it is comprehensive, clearly articulated, and meets the length requirements. After completing your self-assessment and revising as necessary, submit your final document to the appropriate section of the course platform.

Step 5: Submit your assignment by clicking “add a new discussion topic” below and completing the fields.

OPTIONAL Step 6: Interact (10 minutes)

If you would like to, you can reply to your peers' posts in a respectful and professional manner. Ensure that your post engages your peers' ideas by including a reflection on their comments, sharing ideas of other potential difficulties and parties involved, or asking thought-provoking questions. If a peer comments on your posting, please reply. To post a reply, click “Reply” on a particular discussion, write your feedback and then click on “Post to forum.”

Incidence and prevalence are both vitally important concepts in epidemiology and in public health but they are often confused by the media and individuals in the general public (and sometimes even by experts). How would you describe the difference to an individual with no public health or epidemiological training?

How can incidence data be useful to a public health planner who is concerned about the resources needed to treat future patients with a given disease? How can prevalence data be useful to the planner?

In this activity, you will examine and interpret lung cancer incidence rates in the United States over a 40 year period and compare trends over time between males and females. 

Step 1: Access the SEER*Explorer (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program) data from the U.S National Cancer Institute. Spend at least 10 minutes exploring the data and the functionality of this interactive data-generating tool.

Step 2: Generate a graph that illustrates the incidence rates for lung cancer from 1975 to 2017. Ensure that your data set contains information on both sexes.

Use the Seer*Explorer to generate the graph. Make the following selections in the dropdown menus: ‘Lung & Bronchus’ for Choose Cancer Site, ‘SEER Incidence’ for Data Source, 'Race/Ethnicity' for Characteristics to Compare, ‘Both Sexes’ for Sex, ‘All Races (includes Hispanics)’ for Race/Ethnicity Legend, and ‘All Ages’ for Age. Once you have generated the graph, be sure to read the information regarding the 'Data Source' found below the graph to ensure you understand how the data were generated. Click on 'Download and Share' to access the option to save the image.  

Step 3: Answer each of the following questions about the data on cancer incidence in 100 words or less.

1. What types of incidence rates are being presented here?

2. What do the crude incidence rates tell us?

3. What do age-adjusted rates tell us?

4. Why is it important to age-adjust the rate?

Describe the change in U.S. lung cancer incidence from 1975 to 2017 in both men and women combined. Discuss the factors that may account for the observed trends during this time period. Your answer should contain a maximum of 250 words. Be sure to include a copy of your graph in your completed assignment.  

Step 4: Generate a new graph that illustrates the incidence rates for lung cancer in males from 1975 to 2017. Next, include the incidence rates for lung cancer in females during the same time period. Save the graphs.

Step 5: Compare and contrast lung cancer incidence rates in males and in females from 1975 to 2017. Discuss the factors that may account for any observed differences. Be sure to justify your answer. Your answer should contain about 250 to 350 words. Be sure to include a copy of your graphs in your completed assignment. 

Step 6: Discuss why it is important for public health practitioners to examine trends in incidence rates over time. Your answer should contain about 150 to 250 words.

Step 7: Review your work by asking yourself the questions listed below and then revise your document accordingly before final submission to ensure you capture the self-evaluation questions:

1. Have I clearly identified the type of incidence rates used and explained the importance of age adjustment in these rates?
2. Have I discussed, in my own words, the potential factors that might explain the observed trends in cancer incidence rates from 1975 to 2017 (in both men and women combined)?
3. Have I considered and written about possible factors that could have led to any differences in lung cancer incidence rates between males and females during the same time period?
4. Have I included the required graphs as part of my assignment submission?
5. Does my assignment adhere to the word limit, not exceeding 250 words?

Use these self-review criteria to ensure your assignment's content is both accurate and complete. After making any needed changes and confirming your compliance with the word limit, submit the polished version of your assignment to the designated area for evaluation within the self-paced course platform.

Step 8: Submit your assignment by clicking “add a new discussion topic” below and completing the fields.

OPTIONAL Step 9: Interact (10 minutes)

If you would like to, you can reply to your peers' posts in a respectful and professional manner. Ensure that your post engages your peers' ideas by including a reflection on their comments, sharing ideas of other potential difficulties and parties involved, or asking thought-provoking questions. If a peer comments on your posting, please reply. To post a reply, click “Reply” on a particular discussion, write your feedback and then click on “Post to forum.”

Incidence and prevalence tell different stories about the same health outcome. Which measure provides the most useful information about the individual level risk of acquiring an illness and why?  Share your thoughts  by clicking on the button below and include the title "Discussion: Incidence and Prevalence" in the subject line. 

The age-adjusted death rate from myocardial infarction (heart attack) has decreased consistently and dramatically in most of the western world over the past 40 years. Does this necessarily indicate that an individual has a decreased risk of dying from a heart attack? Justify your answer.

Why is it important to know the difference between association and causation, from a public health perspective?  Share your thoughts by clicking on the button below and include the title "Discussion:  Importance of knowing the difference between association and causation" in the subject line.

Have I successfully identified the main risk factors for the selected health issues?

1. Have I clearly described the relevance of social determinants to the selected health issue?
2. Have I proposed three actionable recommendations aimed at improving health equity in relation to the identified social determinants?

Use this evaluation to critically assess the completeness and depth of your analysis. Once you are confident that your work is comprehensive and aligns with the specified criteria, submit your revised document to the appropriate section of the course platform for final review.

Step 5: Submit your assignment by clicking “add a new discussion topic” below and completing the fields.

OPTIONAL Step 6: Interact (10 minutes)

If you would like to, you can reply to your peers' posts in a respectful and professional manner. Ensure that your post engages your peers' ideas by including a reflection on their comments, sharing ideas of other potential difficulties and parties involved, or asking thought-provoking questions. If a peer comments on your posting, please reply. To post a reply, click “Reply” on a particular discussion, write your feedback and then click on “Post to forum.”

Smoking is widely accepted to be a cause of lung cancer. However, 95% of heavy smokers never develop lung cancer. How can this apparent contradiction be explained?

Step 1:  A not-for-profit organization called Epidemiologists Without Borders has reached out to student researchers studying epidemiology at NextGenU.Org. The organization has asked for support in the design of three research projects they plan to carry-out in several of the communities where they currently work. Read these three case studies summarized below.

NOTE: You may substitute one of the case-studies outlined below for a case study that is relevant to your own community. If you choose to do so, generate a case-study regarding a public health problem that is relevant and requires epidemiological research (or ask your mentor to generate one for you). Include the case study when you submit your assignment.

Case study 1:

Vaginal cancer is a rare disease that can often be cured when detected in its early stages. Vaginal cancer occurs more often in women over the age of 50, but can occur at any age. There are usually no symptoms for vaginal cancer. Epidemiologists Without Borders has been awarded a large grant to study the relationship between vaginal cancer and prior exposures to any risk factor among women in a South African city.  

Case study 2:

Epidemiologists Without Borders has learned that a large group of employees who have worked in a specific building (building A) of a very large corporation for more than 25 years appear to have high cancer incidence rates. The corporation has a total of 3 office buildings (buildings A, B, and C). Epidemiologists Without Borders would like to conduct research to determine if the rates of cancer incidence among those workers from building A are in fact higher than expected.

Case study 3:

Epidemiologists Without Borders supports the rights to life, health, and dignity for people who use illicit drugs. The organization is concerned about the high rates of HIV infection it has observed in one particular community and suspects that there are many risk factors possibly contributing to this high HIV risk. Currently, the data in this community with respect to the exact HIV incidence rate among injection drug users is of poor quality, but estimates indicate that the prevalence is as high as 10-20%. Access to HIV testing is also low in this population. Additional challenges include limited resources, and the difficulty in recruiting people for testing due to their high mobility and hidden social networks. 

Epidemiologists without Borders would like to identify potential risk factors for contracting HIV among injection drug users in this community so that it can develop appropriate interventions.

Step 2: Select the most appropriate study design for each of the three case-studies proposed by Epidemiologists Without Borders (or for the one relevant in your community) based on what you have learned in your NextGenU Epidemiology course thus far.

Step 3: Write a letter responding to Epidemiologists Without Borders outlining the study designs that you recommend. Justify why the study designs you selected are appropriate for each of the three case-studies. Your response must also outline at least one benefit and one limitation for each of the study designs you have recommended for each case-study. Your letter to Epidemiologist Without Borders should be clear and concise and contain no more than 850 words.  

Step 4: Review your work by asking yourself the questions listed below and then revise your document accordingly before final submission to ensure you capture the self-evaluation questions:

1. Have I selected suitable study designs for each of the three case studies and provided justifications for these choices?
2. Have I included at least one benefit and one limitation for each of the study designs selected?
3. Does my assignment comply with the word count requirement, not exceeding 850 words?

Utilize these points to ensure that your assignment is methodically reflective of the task requirements. Adjust and improve your document as needed. When you are satisfied that your work effectively meets each of the criteria, submit the final version to the appropriate area of the course system for evaluation.

Step 5: Submit your assignment by clicking “add a new discussion topic” below and completing the fields.

OPTIONAL Step 6: Interact (10 minutes)

If you would like to, you can reply to your peers' posts in a respectful and professional manner. Ensure that your post engages your peers' ideas by including a reflection on their comments, sharing ideas of other potential difficulties and parties involved, or asking thought-provoking questions. If a peer comments on your posting, please reply. To post a reply, click “Reply” on a particular discussion, write your feedback and then click on “Post to forum.”

Randomized control studies are often called ‘the gold standard’ in health research. Do agree with this statement, and why or why not?

This activity gives you the opportunity to apply and build upon what you have learned about epidemiology in this course so far. You will read and critically evaluate an epidemiological research paper of your choice.

Step 1: Review the list of questions outlined below that should be considered when critiquing and evaluating an epidemiology paper. This list is compiled from the resources found in module 6.

Background:

Measures of exposure(s) and outcome(s):

Confounding and bias:

Data analysis:

Results and discussion:

Step 2: Select a Research Report that interests you from this free issue of the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health. When you read your selected article, keep in mind the list of questions that should be considered when critiquing and evaluating an epidemiology paper as outlined in Step 1.

Step 3: In your own words, summarize the aim, the methods, and the main findings of the research paper you selected. Your answer should contain 200-300 words. Make sure you properly cite your selected paper in a footnote. Any citation style that includes the authors and/or source organizations, URLs and publication dates is acceptable. For APA style citations please see McGill University’s APA Citation Style Guide: https://www.mcgill.ca/library/files/library/APA.pdf

Step 4. In 500-750 words, critically discuss the paper you chose by answering at least 6 of the questions presented in step 1. However you must select and discuss at least one question from each of the following sections: Background, Methods, Measures of exposure(s) and outcome(s), Confounding and bias, Data analysis, and Results and discussion.

Step 5: Review your work by asking yourself the questions listed below and then revise your document accordingly before final submission to ensure you capture the self-evaluation questions:

1. Have I included a brief summary that covers the aim, methods, and main findings of the research paper I selected?
2. Did I properly cite the research paper, mentioning the authors, source organizations, URLs, and publication dates as applicable?
3. In my own words, did I thoroughly discuss each of the following sections: Background, Methods, Measures of exposure(s), and outcome(s)?
4. Is the length of my assignment within the set word limit, not exceeding 750 words?

Carefully evaluate your work using these queries as a guide to verify that your assignment meets all specified requirements. After fine-tuning your assignment based on this assessment, proceed to submit the final copy to the designated course platform's submission area for completion.

Step 6: Submit your assignment by clicking “add a new discussion topic” below and completing the fields.

OPTIONAL Step 7: Interact (10 minutes)

If you would like to, you can reply to your peers' posts in a respectful and professional manner. Ensure that your post engages your peers' ideas by including a reflection on their comments, sharing ideas of other potential difficulties and parties involved, or asking thought-provoking questions. If a peer comments on your posting, please reply. To post a reply, click “Reply” on a particular discussion, write your feedback and then click on “Post to forum.”

This activity will give you an opportunity to participate in real-world public health practices using an outbreak case study.

Step 1:  Read Part I - Outbreak Detection in this case study from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that describes an outbreak of botulism in Argentina. 

Step 2:  Answer the following questions that are embedded in the case study:

Question 1: As a public health practitioner in Argentina, what are the major concerns raised by these two possible cases of botulism in Buenos Aires? (List at least 2 major concerns.)

Question 2:  How might you go about swiftly determining if there are other cases of botulism associated with the cases in Buenos Aires? (Describe at least 3 actions that you could take to quickly determine if there are any additional cases.)

Question 3:  What key points would you include in a press release? Outline at least 5 key pieces of information that should be shared with the public at this time in the outbreak investigation. Consider the balance between promoting awareness while avoiding unnecessary public panic.

Question 4: Would you initiate any control measures at this time?  What criteria would you consider when implementing control measures so early in an investigation? Mention 3 or more. (e.g., the severity of the disease, the vulnerability of the population at risk, the likelihood of more cases, the potential negative and positive impacts of control measures, the infectiousness, etc.)

Step 3: Review your work by asking yourself the questions listed below and then revise your document accordingly before final submission to ensure you capture the self-evaluation questions:

1. Have I described three or more actions that could be taken to quickly determine if there are any additional cases?
2. Did I include at least five key pieces of information that would be important to share with the public at this time?
3. Have I mentioned three or more criteria that should be considered when implementing control measures early in an investigation?

Utilize these questions as a framework to critically appraise and enhance the quality of your work. After reviewing your assignment for completeness and relevance, submit the polished version to the designated area on the course platform for assessment.

Step 4: Submit your assignment by clicking “add a new discussion topic” below and completing the fields.

OPTIONAL Step 5: Interact (10 minutes)

If you would like to, you can reply to your peers' posts in a respectful and professional manner. Ensure that your post engages your peers' ideas by including a reflection on their comments, sharing ideas of other potential difficulties and parties involved, or asking thought-provoking questions. If a peer comments on your posting, please reply. To post a reply, click “Reply” on a particular discussion, write your feedback and then click on “Post to forum.”

In this activity, you will apply the concept of prevention in terms of stages to a chronic disease control strategy in your country and consider the ways in which epidemiology can inform public health intervention.

Step 1: Review Table 6.1 "Levels of prevention" found on page 104 in this resource: Basic Epidemiology.

Step 2: Choose one non-communicable chronic disease that is either prevalent in your country or community, or one that you would like to learn more about.  

Step 3: Briefly describe several actions your country could take to contribute to primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention of your chosen chronic disease.  

Please address each of the following points in 200 to 300 words:

Primary: Briefly research (using online resources from a government, university, or professional association) and summarize the common risk factors for your chosen disease. Explain one or more actions your country could take to reduce the population’s exposure to one or more of these risk factors. (Note: Specify if you are recommending a strategy that targets the entire population or only high-risk individuals. ‘Population strategy’ and ‘High-risk individual strategy’ are described on pages 105-108 of the activity resource.)

Secondary: Briefly describe at least one common screening test for your chronic disease, and one or more actions your country could take to increase access to or increase public awareness of the benefits of this test.  (Government websites are often a good place to get information about screening programs in your country. For example, information on cancer screening in the U.S.A. can be found here:http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/screening/)

Tertiary: Summarize one or more actions the healthcare system in your country could take to reduce the progression or complications of the disease you chose to focus on. (For example, you could describe the treatment, rehabilitation, or any other approaches that would help people, with the chronic disease, live longer and healthier lives).

Step 4: Submit your assignment for peer review by clicking “add a new discussion topic” below and completing the fields.

Step 5: Review the work of one of your peers by asking yourself the questions listed below and comment on their post stating that their post meets these requirements.

This activity will give you an opportunity to generate new questions for this course, that will be sent to NextGenU’s Director of Evaluation to review for format and quality, and then on to the course creator for content review. If they are good questions, they will be added to the question bank for the course.

Step 1: Choose any three learning resources from the entire course. Create one multiple-choice question for each of the three resources. Please use this table with the following columns to keep your information organized:

Step 2: Submit your assignment for peer review by clicking “add a new discussion topic” below and completing the fields.

OPTIONAL Step 3: Interact (10 minutes)

If you would like to, you can reply to your peers' posts in a respectful and professional manner. Ensure that your post engages your peers' ideas by including a reflection on their comments, sharing ideas of other potential difficulties and parties involved, or asking thought-provoking questions. If a peer comments on your posting, please reply. To post a reply, click “Reply” on a particular discussion, write your feedback and then click on “Post to forum.”