scholarly journals Quantitative Evaluation of Multiplicity in Epidemiology and Public Health Research

1998 ◽  
Vol 147 (7) ◽  
pp. 615-619 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. J. Ottenbacher
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohannad Al Nsour ◽  
Tala Chahien ◽  
Yousef Khader ◽  
Mirwais Amiri ◽  
Hana Taha

Research is essential for evidence-based decision making. This study aimed to identify research priorities in the areas of field epidemiology and public health in the Eastern Mediterranean Region (EMR) from the perspectives of public health professionals. A Delphi technique, using online survey, was employed to reach 168 public health professionals who have experience in the EMR countries. The study took place between November 2019 and January 2020. Consensus on the research priorities was reached after two-round online questionnaires. A list of top 10 field epidemiology and public health research priorities in the EMR was developed. Of those priorities, four fell under health in emergency, war and armed conflict, two under communicable diseases, two under immunization, one under digital health, and one under sexual, reproductive, and adolescent health. Availability, adequacy, and quality of health services in crisis settings were scored as a top priority (mean = 4.4, rank 1), followed by use of technology to improve the collection, documentation, and analysis of health data (mean = 4.28, rank 2), and capacity of countries in the region to respond to emergencies (mean = 4.25, rank 3). This study was conducted prior to COVID-19 pandemic and, thus, it did not capture COVID-19 research as a priority area. Nevertheless, identified priorities under communicable diseases including outbreak investigation of infectious diseases, epidemics and challenges related to communicable diseases in the EMR were still notable. In conclusion, the field epidemiology and public health research priorities identified in this study through a systematic inclusive process could be useful to make informed decisions and gear the research efforts to improve the health of people in the EMR.


2013 ◽  
Vol 42 (3) ◽  
pp. 913-913 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Gedeon ◽  
C. Shamlaye ◽  
G. J. Myers ◽  
P. Bovet

2021 ◽  
Vol 70 (3) ◽  
pp. e95888
Author(s):  
Adalberto Campo-Arias ◽  
John Carlos Pedrozo-Pupo ◽  
Leynin Esther Caamaño-Rocha

In epidemiology and public health research, caution is necessary when addressing results reported by studies based on the administration of online questionnaires. The most critical limitation in such studies is their impossibility of guaranteeing the representativeness of the sample. However, when having a representative sample is secondary, online questionnaires are an excellent alternative for exploratory studies that seek to obtain information about emerging phenomena quickly and cost-effectively or address sensitive issues, for this approach allows reaching populations difficult to get in contact with using traditional strategies. Online research allows the complete anonymity of participants and ensures they provide a more honest response, regardless of their social desirability, any stigma, or discrimination.


2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle Amri ◽  
Christina Angelakis ◽  
Dilani Logan

Abstract Objective Through collating observations from various studies and complementing these findings with one author’s study, a detailed overview of the benefits and drawbacks of asynchronous email interviewing is provided. Through this overview, it is evident there is great potential for asynchronous email interviews in the broad field of health, particularly for studies drawing on expertise from participants in academia or professional settings, those across varied geographical settings (i.e. potential for global public health research), and/or in circumstances when face-to-face interactions are not possible (e.g. COVID-19). Results Benefits of asynchronous email interviewing and additional considerations for researchers are discussed around: (i) access transcending geographic location and during restricted face-to-face communications; (ii) feasibility and cost; (iii) sampling and inclusion of diverse participants; (iv) facilitating snowball sampling and increased transparency; (v) data collection with working professionals; (vi) anonymity; (vii) verification of participants; (viii) data quality and enhanced data accuracy; and (ix) overcoming language barriers. Similarly, potential drawbacks of asynchronous email interviews are also discussed with suggested remedies, which centre around: (i) time; (ii) participant verification and confidentiality; (iii) technology and sampling concerns; (iv) data quality and availability; and (v) need for enhanced clarity and precision.


2017 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 89-89 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donna F. Stroup ◽  
C. Kay Smith ◽  
Benedict I. Truman

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document