Suppose a team of researchers conducted a retrospective coho…

Suppose a team of researchers conducted a retrospective cohort study on the effect of childhood adverse events on obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD, which is a type of anxiety disorder) among adults aged 18-25. For their study, the researchers randomly selected a sample of 2,000 adults aged 18-25 living in the United States.   The researchers found a risk ratio of 2.32 indicating that individuals who experienced adverse childhood events had a 2.32 times higher risk of developing OCD compared to individuals who did not experience any adverse childhood events. The researchers wonder to what extent the finding from their study is valid for adults aged 18-25 living in Canada.   What is the type of validity are the researchers wondering about?

Suppose that a group of researchers performed a prospective…

Suppose that a group of researchers performed a prospective cohort study on the association between obesity and colon cancer. To determine colon cancer status, participants underwent a colonoscopy. Table 1 shows the exposure-group specific sensitivity and specificity of colonoscopies for detecting colon cancer.   Table 1. Hypothetical data on the sensitivity and specificity of colonoscopies across individuals without and with obesity.     Individuals without obesity Individuals with obesity Colonoscopy Sensitivity 79% 71% Specificity 93% 93%   Based on the information in Table 1, will there be no misclassification, nondifferential misclassification, or differential misclassification of colon cancer in this study? (2 points) Explain your choice (max. 4 points).

Case 2 (Questions 19 and 20) Suppose a team of researchers c…

Case 2 (Questions 19 and 20) Suppose a team of researchers conducted a prospective cohort study on the effect of physical activity on the 6-month risk of depression. To assess potential effect modification by gender, the researchers estimated the effect of physical activity on depression separately for men and women. In men, the estimated risk difference was -0.11 and the estimated risk ratio was 0.71. In women, the estimated risk difference was -0.07 and the estimated risk ratio was 0.80. Based on these effect estimates the researchers concluded that gender is indeed an effect modifier, so the researchers decided to report the conditional effect estimates in their manuscript. Please provide an interpretation of the estimated risk ratio of 0.71. Assume that physical activity was the exposure level of interest and physical inactivity was the comparison level.