What is the fundamental difference between the method you have chosen (either the case-control or cohort method) and the randomized controlled trial? NR 503 Week 3 Discussion

NR 503 Week 3 Discussion-Epidemiological Methods and Measurements

This week, we compare and contrast epidemiological research methods, case-control, and cohort study methods. Select the case-control or cohort study method and compare its features and methodology to a randomized controlled trial using the following questions. Please format and organize your responses using each question below:

What is the fundamental difference between the method you have chosen (either the case-control or cohort method) and the randomized controlled trial?

 The main difference between a randomized control trial (RCT) and a cohort study is that the RCT has researcher-controlled interventions while the cohort study observes outcomes that occur naturally (Hariton & Locascio, 2018; Wang & Kattan, 2020). RCT studies examine the effects of a new treatment or intervention by randomly separating the participants into the intervention and comparison groups. The participants are usually divided into groups by a computerized system to ensure that no participants are aware of their placed groups (Hariton & Locascio, 2018). Cohort studies observe participants from two different groups over a more extended period to suggest a relationship between the outcome and time of exposure. Cohort studies examine groups that have and have not been exposed to an issue to evaluate the product. Cohort studies are utilized to study prognosis, incidence, and causes (Wang & Kattan, 2020).

What are the advantages and disadvantages of your chosen study method (case-control or cohort study)?

 An advantage of a cohort study is its capability to research many different outcomes related to exposures within one study. The study design also makes studying the effects of several exposures on one result possible. Compared to RCT, cohort studies have extensive inclusion criteria and fewer exclusion criteria. Cohort studies allow researchers to attain a larger sample size, allowing for improved generalizability. A better understanding of the relationships between the exposure and the outcomes can be measured due to the length of the study and the changes over time. Retrospective cohort studies associate products and exposures from data collected from the past, which can help save time and money (Wang & Kattan, 2020).

One disadvantage of a cohort study is the possibility of a high rate of follow-ups lost due to the extended study time needed to wait for changes. Another disadvantage is the inability of the researcher to control the data collection in retrospective cohort studies, which can lead to bias (Wang & Kattan, 2020).