In this case, the assumption of researcher A is reliable than researcher B based on research style, advantages or disadvantages of research design and review of past researches. For the reliable results of epidemiological studies, the following conditions are necessary: 1) representativeness of the sample; 2) a single diagnostic approach in determining a link between cancer and vegetable intake; 3) the use of methods that correspond to the main objectives of the study.
According to a research done by Tao, Zheng, Gao, Ruan, Cheng & Shu (2005) stated that the result of suggesting that high ingesting of some vegetables may decrease the risk of endometrial cancer. (Tao, Zheng, Gao, Ruan, Cheng & Shu, 2005)
Whereas another study proves that, “there is no direct link between fruit or vegetable intake in cancer and consumption of fruit and vegetables was commonly unrelated to total cancer occurrence” (George, Park, Leitzmann, Dowling, Reedy & Subar, 2008).
With cross-design, patients receive both control and test stimuli in a randomized order. (Fallman, 2008). This is the opposite of a parallel-group design, with each patient being the basis for estimating the differences between test exposure and control exposure. Situations where cross-sectional studies may be helpful include chronic diseases that remain stable over a more extended period (such as cancer, diabetes or arthritis, for example), and where the goal of treatment is a palliative effect rather than a cure. (Verhoeven, Goldbohm, van Poppel, Verhagen, & van den Brandt, 2016).
The described study is cross-sectioned, as it represents a particular imprint of the moment, which reflects only the current situation. From here, a design critique is derived using static groups. Unlike strict experiment, there is no means to certify that the compared groups are equivalent before the start of the study. In the absence of a pre-test (and here it cannot be by definition), it is difficult for a sociologist to control the background factors. (Jones & Kenward, 2014).
A case-control study is constantly retrospective, past data, and collect data used to see the link between suspected risk and specific result. Scientists do not need to wait and record the effects that will occur in the future, as is the case in prospective studies. But the main drawback of the case-control study is that they study the events that have already occurred (they are retrospective), which means that they are not as reliable and not as informative as prospective studies.
Fallman, D. (2008). The interaction design research triangle of design practice, design studies,
and design exploration. Design Issues, 24(3), 4-18.
George, S. M., Park, Y., Leitzmann, M. F., Freedman, N. D., Dowling, E. C., Reedy, J., ... &
Subar, A. F. (2008). Fruit and vegetable intake and risk of cancer: a prospective cohort study. The American journal of clinical nutrition, 89(1), 347-353.
Jones, B., & Kenward, M. G. (2014). Design and analysis of cross-over trials. Chapman and
Tao, M. H., Xu, W. H., Zheng, W., Gao, Y. T., Ruan, Z. X., Cheng, J. R., ... & Shu, X. O.
(2005). A case–control study in Shanghai of fruit and vegetable intake and endometrial cancer. British journal of cancer, 92(11), 2059.
Verhoeven, D. T., Goldbohm, R. A., van Poppel, G., Verhagen, H., & van den Brandt, P. A.
(2016). Epidemiological studies on brassica vegetables and cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention Biomarkers, 5(9), 733-748.
Useful LinksFree Essays About Blog
If you have any queries please write to us
Join our mailing list
@ All Rights Reserved 2023 firstname.lastname@example.org