Assignment On Employs A Cross Sectional Study Design

Running head: EPIDEMIOLOGY
EPIDEMIOLOGY
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1EPIDEMIOLOGY
Question 1:
(a) The paper employs a cross-sectional study design. Considering the fact that this is a cross
sectional study design, this paper evaluates the exposure and outcomes of the participants
observed at the same time.
STATA 13.0 (Software for Statistics and Data Sciences) was used to calculate the
sample size. This STATA 13.0 as a data collection tool applied WHO questionnaire for
studying domestic violence in Vietnam (Wassertheil-Smoller & Smoller, 2015).
(b) The main outcomes of this study include organising interview of the participants as well
as identifying the exposure to domestic violence in Vietnam. Mean as well as standard
deviation were calculated. The study had been divided into four different parts. These four
parts were domestic violence, sexual violence, emotional violence and physical violence. The
percentage as well as frequencies of the affected participants were statistically tabulated.
Another significant outcome of this study included a statistical representation of
women to domestic violence in Vietnam. This study is also depicted a significant relation
between domestic violence and low weight neonates (Vachhani et al., 2017).
(c) Considering the fact that this study is a cross-sectional study, it is noteworthy to state that
the risk of selection bias is low. Selection bias is defined as the process of selection of the
group of individuals for a study where significant randomisation at the time of data collection
as well as result interpretation is not performed. Here, out of 24 districts 10 districts were
selected randomly.

2EPIDEMIOLOGY
(d)
Details Case
exposure
Control
Exposure
Yes
54 203
Exposure
No
106 736
For this study, the expected crude Odd ratio for domestic violence=
[(54)/(106)]/[(203)/(736)] = 1.85
So, the crude odds ratio for this study is 1.85
(e) In this study, the adjusted value of odd ratio was 1.44. While the calculated value was
1.85. The odd ratio differs due to the significant presence of confounder variables other than
domestic violence.
(f) As per table 5, the effect of physical violence on low birth weight was less since only 13
individuals out of 160 test individuals reported to be associated with physical violence. The
adjusted prevalence ratio was found to be 0.69. This value is comparatively less than 1.44 for
domestic violence. The reason for this less value is that, physical violence was not the only
factor in reducing its prevalence ratio. Sexual and environmental violence also influenced the
value. Therefore the value is less (Steele et al., 2019).
(g) As described in the paper, measurement bias arose from a cross-sectional study and usage
of the questionnaire to interview events that occurred previously. Authors tried to minimise