Microsoft Word - HST XXXXXXXXXXAssessment 2 - Marking Key Edith Cowan University School of Medical and Health Sciences School of Medical and Health Sciences Page 1 HST XXXXXXXXXXEpidemiology...

Running Head: EPIDEMIOLOGY        1
EPIDEMIOLOGY         2
HST5120 2019.2 EPIDEMIOLOGY
ASSESSMENT 2 – CRITICAL ANALYSIS
MOBILE PHONE USE AND RISK OF BRAIN TUMOURS – WHAT DOES THE EVIDENCE SHOW?
Table of Contents
Introduction    3
Critical Analysis    3
Research Hypothesis    3
Research Design    4
Outcome Variable    5
Exposure    6
Analysis Methods    7
Potential Sources of Bias    8
Result Interpretation    9
Implication of Research Results in Practice    9
Conclusion    11
References    12
Introduction
Critical analysis is a very efficient tool in order to analyse a specific study. It allows identifying the significance as well as relevance of a study based upon certain that every research must fulfil. Further, different study designs have different characteristics and therefore different critical appraisal questions are used. It can also be considered as a systematic process that allows identification of strengths and weakness of a research and therefore allows assessing its usefulness and validity for cu
ent implication and future findings respectively. In this report, six different articles related to mobile phone use and risk of
ain tumours will be analysed in order to validate their study designs and results.
Critical Analysis
Research Hypothesis
The aim of the article by Frei et al. (2011) is to identify the risk of tumours related to central nervous system (CNS) especially among mobile phone users from Danish mobile company. The aim of the article by Coureau et al. (2014) is to analyse relation between exposure from mobile phone and tumours of CNS in adults. The article by Hardell, Carlberg and Mild (2010) focuses on the fact that recently dead individuals were considered to determine risk of
ain tumours due to use of mobile or cordless phones.
The article by Hardell, Carlberg, Soderqvist and Mild (2013) aimed to identify relation between long-term use of mobile phones and development of malignant
ain tumours. The article by Cardis et al. (2011) focuses on the association of
ain tumours with different radio frequencies field from mobile phones. The aim of the article by Aydin et al. (2011) is to study the risk of
ain tumours among children and adolescents was identified through this study.
Research Design
    Citations
    Study Design
    Experimental or Observational
    Frei et al. (2011)
    Nationwide cohort study
    Experimental
    Coureau et al. (2014)
    Case-control Study
    Observational
    Hardell, Carlberg and Mild (2010)
    Case-control Study
    Observational
    Hardell, Carlberg, Soderqvist and Mild (2013)
    Case-control Study
    Experimental
    Cardis et al. (2011)
    International Case-control Study
    Observational
    Aydin et al. (2011)
    A Multicentre Case–control Study
    Observational
The sample size for this study by Frei et al. (2011) was very large and could not be addressed with any other study design. For the article by Coureau et al. (2014), case-control studies allowed better comparison of tumours that may be caused due to another stimulus. For the article by Hardell, Carlberg and Mild (2010), deceased individuals cannot be confronted with any other study design and most previous studies left out deceased individuals.
In the article by Hardell, Carlberg, Soderqvist and Mild (2013), sample size allowed better comparison between cases and control and even cases were also used as control for other severe cases. For the study design followed by Cardis et al. (2011), international case controlled study allowed the identification of impact of various RFs used for mobile phone upon
ain tumours. Lastly, the study by Aydin et al. (2011) is based upon multicentre research and this provides credibility as well as makes the design suitable for research question.
Outcome Variable
For the study by Frei et al. (2011), the outcome suggested there is no increase in tumours and case was precisely defined. For the study by Coureau et al. (2014), the outcome suggested possible association between heavy mobile use and
ain tumours and precise case deification was given. For the article by Hardell, Carlberg and Mild (2010), the outcome from this study confirmed the results from previous study that suggested association between mobile phone use and
ain tumours. The study by Hardell, Carlberg, Soderqvist and Mild (2013) confirmed the relation between cordless phones and mobiles causes malignant
ain tumours. For the article by Cardis et al. (2011), High RF exposure was associated with increased risk of glioma and smaller RF was associated with meningioma. On the other hand, for the article by Aydin et al. (2011), the outcome has not been properly defined and there is no precise case definition.
Frei et al. (2011) showed that the data related to subscribers was collected from Danish network operators and then follow up was done with tumour cases during the specified years. In the study by Coureau et al. (2014), Face-to-face interviews were conducted through trained interviewers using standardized questionnaire. However, in the paper by Hardell, Carlberg and Mild (2010), the data was collected through questionnaire sent to next-of-kin and responses received were analysed in both control and cases. This would not allow identification of mobile phone impact upon death. On the contrary, in the paper by Hardell, Carlberg, Soderqvist and Mild (2013), data was collected from medical regions with cancer registry and both men and women between age 18 and 75 years, getting diagnosed with
ain tumour were interviewed along with control, while in the paper...