Van Rossum, C. T. M., et al. (2000). Employment grade differences…

Question Answered step-by-step Van Rossum, C. T. M., et al. (2000). Employment grade differences…  Van Rossum, C. T. M., et al. (2000). Employment grade differences in cause-specific mortality. A 25 year follow up of civil servants from the first Whitehall Study. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 200(54), 178-184.Actionsquestions in follow to the article below:1. What was the context and motivation of the study? 2.What was the primary outcome of interest (i.e., identify the outcome variable)? How was the outcome defined/operationalized?3.What was the primary exposure of interest? How was the exposure defined/operationalized?4.Describe the source of the study participants and characteristics of the participants. What was the sample size of the group followed in the study?  5.Could there have been bias in the selection of the study subjects? Explain your answer. 6.Could there have been bias in the collection of information, such as misclassification? Explain your answer.7.What measures of disease frequency and association were reported in this study? 8.What measures of statistical stability were reported in this study? 9.What risk factors were adjusted for in the analysis?10.The authors identify an “inverse gradient” for mortality by employment grade.  What do they mean?11.The authors find consistent results for multiple causes of death.  Explain this “general susceptibility” finding in your own words. What are some possible mechanisms or explanations for this “general susceptibility”?12.How might results in this study have been biased by the way information was collected or how the sample was selected? Discuss direction and magnitude of any bias.13.Would you expect the study’s findings to be generalizable to the U.S. population? What patterns would you expect to see in the U.S. population? Health Science Science Nursing MPH 612 Share QuestionEmailCopy link Comments (0)