Disease Detectives B/C

[IvySpear]

What are the chances that the test will test stuff on historical cases, and if it does, usually how in depth are the questions?

[Alex-RCHS]

What are the chances that the test will test stuff on historical cases, and if it does, usually how in depth are the questions?

Many tests will ask you about John Snow, the founder of field epidemiology; and Hippocrates, the founder of medicine. I haven't been asked about much else.

For Snow you need to know that he worked on a Cholera outbreak in London. The year was 1854, but that's probably not important. He used a spot map to trace the source of the outbreak to a water pump handle. He solved the outbreak by removing the handle.

Hippocrates searched for a logical explanation for disease. He made a lot of contributions to modern medicine. That's about all you really need.

[Skink]

What are the chances that the test will test stuff on historical cases, and if it does, usually how in depth are the questions?

They really shouldn't, as history isn't technically a testable topic; review section 3 in the rules. The thing is, though, that a lot of supervisors (in both divisions) don't really understand what the field is about and, so, sometimes write questions that are well outside the scope of what this event is trying to get at. My team took an invitational test last season that had a huge history section, and one of the scientists they asked about doesn't exist ...

I do recommend getting a very loose handle on some history, though, stuff like this if you have time. It protects you from history questions, gives you a better handle on how the epi you're supposed to know developed, and is, at times, interesting just by itself.

[IvySpear]

Oh thanks! I was also wondering, how often will I have to deal with stuff like confounders and biases? I know the rules said they will be included, but what proportion of the test do they usually make up (And I mean state-level or nationals-level tests)?

[Skink]

Proportion? Single digits percentage, probs...I find this part tricky because I don't think the topics laid out in the Training Handout are detailed enough, so my team goes one step deeper. That's worked out well at the State level.

[mc408]

Those of you who have read the CDC textbook "Principles of Epidemiology" or any other textbook of similar depth, how comprehensively does it cover the breadth of information enumerated by the rules for the event? Is it necessary to go on Wikipedia to study any concepts in more depth or does the book provide a solid enough base of knowledge to the point at which simply doing a few practice tests thereafter will be sufficient preparation for states/nats?

[Alex-RCHS]

Those of you who have read the CDC textbook "Principles of Epidemiology" or any other textbook of similar depth, how comprehensively does it cover the breadth of information enumerated by the rules for the event? Is it necessary to go on Wikipedia to study any concepts in more depth or does the book provide a solid enough base of knowledge to the point at which simply doing a few practice tests thereafter will be sufficient preparation for states/nats?

I've read all of the most applicable parts and skimmed the rest. It's good supplementation, but it's not enough to use as your sole studying source. At the very least you should read it, then do some practice tests, then do some general studying on stuff in the practice tests that you didn't know.

[mc408]

Those of you who have read the CDC textbook "Principles of Epidemiology" or any other textbook of similar depth, how comprehensively does it cover the breadth of information enumerated by the rules for the event? Is it necessary to go on Wikipedia to study any concepts in more depth or does the book provide a solid enough base of knowledge to the point at which simply doing a few practice tests thereafter will be sufficient preparation for states/nats?

I've read all of the most applicable parts and skimmed the rest. It's good supplementation, but it's not enough to use as your sole studying source. At the very least you should read it, then do some practice tests, then do some general studying on stuff in the practice tests that you didn't know.

Ah okay thank you. How long did it take you to read it?

[Alex-RCHS]

Those of you who have read the CDC textbook "Principles of Epidemiology" or any other textbook of similar depth, how comprehensively does it cover the breadth of information enumerated by the rules for the event? Is it necessary to go on Wikipedia to study any concepts in more depth or does the book provide a solid enough base of knowledge to the point at which simply doing a few practice tests thereafter will be sufficient preparation for states/nats?

I've read all of the most applicable parts and skimmed the rest. It's good supplementation, but it's not enough to use as your sole studying source. At the very least you should read it, then do some practice tests, then do some general studying on stuff in the practice tests that you didn't know.

Ah okay thank you. How long did it take you to read it?

I read it off and on and took notes. It took me about 2 months of reading for about 1-2 hours per week.

[Skink]

I find the CDC online book inadequate, but, more to the point, the print book I own is inadequate, too. This event really hits two different topics: epidemiology and biostatistics. You really need something for both. Well, then there's the topical stuff, which may be a third arm...I don't think you'll find everything under one roof anywhere.