100%(1)1 out of 1 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 1 - 3 out of 5 pages.
EPI201: Homework 3 Page 1 of 5 NAME: Mariel Arvizu EPI201: Fall 2014 Homework 3 Part I 1.The authors adjusted for professional status in their analysis of the association between floor of residence and all-cause mortality. Do you think that the authors made the correct decision? Using your subject matter knowledge and the information in the paper, discuss whether or not professional status would possess the properties of a confounder. No, professional status does not appear to comply with the properties of a confounder given that: -From information on table 1, there does not appear to be a difference in floor level and professional status, therefore there is no association between professional status and floor level habitation. -Professional status maybe related to higher education or lower education that may lead to lifestyle decisions such as exercise, healthier diet, preventive practices. Therefore, professional status is associated to the outcome conditional on the exposure. -In the DAG, professional status is neither a downstream effect of ACM or floor level and from expert knowledge; temporality goes forward from professional status leads to acquiring a better or worse floor level. Thus, adjusting for professional might have been unnecessary so I don’t entirely agree with this decision. Part II 1.What is the base population for this study? 2.How were the cases and controls defined and identified? ProfessionalstatusFloor levelAll-cause mortality