Analyze

They calculated the observed/expected (O/E) ratio of thyroid cancer prevalence for residents in Fukushima Prefecture that were below the age of 20. Observed prevalence was calculated by the number of thyroid cancer cases detected by the end of April 2015. The number of detected cases was corrected for screening rate by multiplying the inverse of the age-specific screening rate. The expected prevalence was obtained from another report, which was calulated using a life-table method using national estimates from 2001-10. Age-specific prevalence of thyroid cancer was estimated using the cumulative risk from 2010. The annual percent change of increasing cases of thyroid cancer was taken into account as well. 

After the Fukushima disaster, thyroid examinations were performed on residents less than 18 years of age. The first three years post disaster are noted as the "Initial phase" and act as a control. Of those tested, 113 cases were suspected of or found to have thyroid malignancies, 99 of those underwent surgery. After this, the goal became to compare and observe prevalence of thyroid cancer in this initial screen program with historical controls based off if there was a nuclear disaster or not.

For this study, the observed/expected ratio was calculated for residents less than 20 years old. Observed prevalence of cancer was calculated using numbers found in the initial thyroid screening program mentioned above. Expected prevalence was then calculated by using a life-table method utilizing national estimates of thyroid cancer incidences before the disaster. The population of Fukushima was taken into account.  A 5 year cumulative risk of thyroid cancer incidences was calculated for the year of 2010.  This 5 year risk was then converted to a 1 year cumulative risk using a method called spline smoothing. Then the age-specific prevalence of thyroid cancer was estimated by multiplying the 0 year old population by the age specific risk in 2010. 

I have done research involving cancer rates and their correlation with power plants (in my case Indian Point.) Doing that research caused me to read hundreds of studies similar to this one where estimates are made using calculations based off cancer rates before the incident and then taking them and putting them into context of a post disaster area. I wouldn't quite say that this method is new or inventive but it follows similar methodology to other studies of this same caliber, yet there are aspects that make it more unique such as converting the 5 year to 1 year cumulative risk using a spline smoothing method. 

The study used ultrasound to detect if there was cancerous masses in the subjects thyroid. If cancer was detected subjects underwent surgerical treatments. 

The study used ultrasound to detect if there was cancerous masses in the subjects thyroid. If cancer was detected subjects underwent surgerical treatments. 

The methodology of the study involves looking at past epidemics in the world countries and connect the dots. How did these epedemics happen? Due to a natural disaster? Okay why? Looking at factors that cause each epidemic and trying to discover a parallel. While this is not a new way of studying an issue it is an inventive way because it can be a new way to treat global epidemics: through disaster preparation.

This study looks at the connection between structural violence (social arrangements that put individuals and populations in harms way) to the spread of HIV/AIDs in America and abroad. Instead of looking at HIV/AIDs as a disease that is spread due to an individual’s lifestyle and decisions, it approaches the disease as something that aggregates disproportionately in impoverished communities. This same methodology is applied to the prevalence of pediatric aids in Rwanda, looking at which mothers have access to the appropriate healthcare equipment and why.

                The methodology of the study is fairly standard. It uses basic reasoning, supported with conclusive data to make its point on the true and falsehoods of communicable diseases associated with natural disasters.

This was a retrospective study. While not the most accurate and well supported way to conduct a study, due to the effects of recall bias, it was really the only way to gain the data that was presented in the report. There isn't really anything new about the style of research. 

The study looks at the physical and mental health profiles of prisoners, and incarceration as both a health risk and health opportunity. This seems like a new way of studying the issue, as I've heard of studies only looking at the race of prisoners in the U.S. 

The main method has used in this study by review the health profiles of the incarcerated group. Via this method, the basic background information can be gather and analyze with categorized people into different groups such age, races, gender etc. Furthermore, with group analyze some conclusion can be made to execute a possible solution to decrease the incarcerated people in order to improve health conditions. The health records are also useful to make prediction trend of the future environment, even though the conclusion from the prediction is the situation would not change as much as general publics and authorities expected.

By reviewing health profiles of the incarcerated group to study this issue, personally would say it is quite a quick and reliable way but not quite sure on the innovation level of this kind of methodology. Another issue with method is the possibility on the violation of personal information and ethical controversy.