reported duration versus true follow up duration
Posted in the Epidemiology Forum
#1 Oct 13, 2013
we have been carrying out a study to estimate risk of TB among diabetics. We interviewed about 4000 diabetic patients and asked about duration of diabetes and if have ever been diagnosed of TB.If so, time of infection was also inquired about.
Although there is no true follow up, can we rely on reported duration to calculate person years and hence estimate incidence rate.
if this is epidemiologically acceptable, What would be the correct description of study design?
Add your comments below
|Bipolar Hypersexuality and Propagation (Sep '17)||Sep '17||johnny_throwaway14||1|
|Feds confirm cancer cluster from Tamaqua to Haz... (Aug '08)||Aug '17||sad sad sad||83|
|Hair Dye, Chemical Relaxers Linked to Breast Ca... (Jul '17)||Jul '17||sankt||1|
|MMR coverage vs. confirmed cases (May '17)||May '17||Sterling||2|
|Which epidemiological study design to choose? (Jan '17)||Jan '17||sharu043||1|
|Economics of Epidemiology (Jan '17)||Jan '17||maahrose||1|
|Need suggestions (Jan '17)||Jan '17||maahrose||2|
Find what you want!
Search Epidemiology Forum Now
Copyright © 2018 Topix LLC