W2 Test Bank Chapter Qs

An epidemiologist has written a summary of a food poisoning outbreak, including its cause and ways to prevent it from occurring in the future. Which best describes what has been done?

• Analytic epidemiology

• Descriptive epidemiology

• Prospective cohort study

• Retrospective cross-sectional survey

Answer explanation

→ Descriptive epidemiology

---

There are two principal types of epidemiology:

(1) analytic epidemiology and

(2) descriptive epidemiology.

Descriptive epidemiology describes the amount and distribution of disease, which may suggest possible causes. These causes can then be confirmed or corrected through more advanced methods of research.

Analytic epidemiology investigates the causes of disease by determining why a disease rate is lower in one population group than another.

A prospective cohort study monitors a group of disease-free individuals to determine whether and when disease occurs.

Retrospective studies compare individuals with a particular condition or disease and those who do not have the disease.

Two brothers played with their cousin. One brother later became quite ill, whereas the other did not. Which provides the best explanation for this occurrence?

• Difference in length of time exposed

• Difference in how actively the children played

• Difference in genetic inheritance between the two brothers

• Difference in lifestyle between the two brothers

Answer explanation

→ Difference in genetic inheritance between the two brothers

---

Assuming the two brothers lived in the same household, the environment and the agent or infec- tious organisms are the same. The only difference could be between the two brothers themselves and their genetic inheritance.

In which circumstance would it be more helpful to use the wheel model of epidemiology than the epidemiological triangle model?

• When factors outside the triangle model are involved

• When there are multiple causes for a chronic disease

• When research has not yet determined the exact cause

• When trying to explain the situation to a lay person

Answer explanation

→ When there are multiple causes for a chronic disease

The epidemiological triangle model of agent-host-environment is very useful, especially with single-cause infectious diseases. However, with the multiple factors involved in chronic diseases, the wheel model is more useful in analyzing and identifying the multiple variables.

Which best describes the importance of discovering all of the variables that may be involved in creating a disease state in some persons?

• People want an explanation of why they are ill.

• Knowing causes helps obtain funds for research to try to create a cure.

• Finding variables that are susceptible to prevention or early intervention is important.

• It is important to educate communities on how to avoid any risk factors.

Answer explanation

→ Finding variables that are susceptible to prevention or early intervention is important.

---

Identifying risk factors is critical to creating or discovering specific prevention and intervention approaches that reduce chronic disease morbidity and mortality. Because some risk factors cannot be avoided, knowing other risk factors involved allows for more possibilities of preventing the problem. These variables need to be identified first so that health care providers are able to provide an explanation to persons as to why they are ill, obtain funding for research for the problem, and educate the community about the avoidance of the known risk factors.

Which best describes the advantage of the web of causation model in comparison with the epidemiological triangle model?

• The web of causation model is easier to understand and use.

• The web of causation model is more widely known and publicized

• The web of causation model is more recent and current.

• The web of causation model shows the relationships among variables.

Answer explanation

→ The web of causation model shows the relationships among variables.

---

Although it is a more recently created model, the web of causation model is more useful because it illustrates the complexity of relationships among causable variables. It is not easier to understand and use as it has more variables than the three (agent, host, and environment) in the epidemiological model.

Which has been determined to be a major variable in transmission of sexually transmitted infections?

• The pathogenesis of the involved agents

• The susceptibility of the host

• The environment in which the hosts live

• The amount of sex education provided in the schools

Answer explanation

The environment in which the hosts live

---

The researchers concluded that ecosocial or contextual conditions strongly enhance sexually transmitted infection risk by increasing sexual risk behaviors and likelihood of exposure to infec- tion. Thus, the environment has been determined to be a more important variable in sexually transmitted infections than the pathogenesis, susceptibility, and the amount of sex education pro- vided.

A community health nurse determined exactly how many cases of a particular disease were currently occurring in the community. Which action should the nurse take before determining what interventions should be planned?

• Analyze whether the disease was a priority to the nurse’s agency

• Compare the current rate with the previous rate of disease

• Determine what resources are available to intervene

• Share the findings with the public health agency leadership

Answer explanation

Compare the current rate with the previous rate of disease

---

No conclusions can really be drawn from just knowing a number. Only by converting that count to a rate and then comparing the rate with the previous rate, or with the rate in the broader environment or a similar community nearby, can any conclusions be drawn as to whether there is a problem or intervention needed. Once the rate has been calculated, the nurse will be able to share the findings with leadership, determine the resources available to intervene if necessary, and determine if the disease is a priority.

People were very concerned about another outbreak of swine flu. All care providers were asked to report, without individual names, any new cases to the public health department for tracking. Which would be most helpful for the local media to report to keep citizens informed?

• The ongoing incidence rate

• The ongoing prevalence of the illness

• How many were hospitalized

• How many had died so far in local hospitals and care facilities

Answer explanation

→ The ongoing incidence rate

---

As only new cases were being reported to the health department, the media could only report the ongoing incidence rate, that is, the number of new cases reported each day. The prevalence rate is the number of all cases of a specific disease or condition in a population at a given point in time which would not assist in knowing the number of new cases. Those infected with the flu may or may not be hospitalized or have died from the flu.

When trying to determine whether the swine flu outbreak was getting worse, which rate should be carefully observed?

• The crude death rate

• The age-specific death rate

• The swine flu incidence rate

• The swine flu prevalence rate

Answer explanation

The swine flu incidence rate

---

The incidence rate of new cases would be most useful for detecting short-term acute disease changes, because the swine flu duration is usually relatively short. The prevalence rate is the number of all cases of a specific disease or condition in a population at a given point in time. Crude death rates summarize the occurrence of mortality. An age-specific death rate characterizes the death rates of a particular age group in the population.

A newspaper published an article stating that the athletic banquet at the local high school had approximately 1000 family members in attendance. Exactly 650 persons became ill within 24 hours, complaining of severe diarrhea, vomiting, and cramping. Which best describes the attack rate?

• 650 persons

• 1000 persons

• 650:1000

• 6.5%

Answer explanation

650:1000

---

Rates are calculated by the number of people with the problem over the number exposed to the problem. In this case, 650 persons out of the 1000 at the banquet complained of illness. Although this rate could be presented as an attack rate of 65%, 6.5% is incorrect.