Epidemiology paper outline
Territories , July July 24, ; Accessed: July 24, United States Environmental Protection Agency. Kelly JC. May 8, ; Accessed: June 1, CDC Health Network.
- Writing an Epidemiology Paper in a Few Easy Steps by John Hokanson : epidemiology?
- thesis on honesty as an important quality!
- character analysis essay grade 5.
May 5, ;. Detection of Zika virus in urine. Zika virus infection complicated by Guillain-Barre syndrome--case report, French Polynesia, December Fontes BM. Zika virus-related hypertensive iridocyclitis. Arq Bras Oftalmol. Ophthalmological findings in infants with microcephaly and presumable intra-uterus Zika virus infection.
Butler D. Zika virus: Brazil's surge in small-headed babies questioned by report. Log In. Sign Up It's Free! Register Log In. No Results. If you log out, you will be required to enter your username and password the next time you visit. Log out Cancel.
Share Email Print Feedback Close. Zika Virus. Sections Zika Virus. Pathophysiology Like many other flaviviruses, Zika virus is transmitted by an arthropod: the Aedes mosquito, including Aedes aegypti, Aedes africanus , Aedes luteocephalus , Aedes albopictus , Aedes vittatus , Aedes furcifer, Aedes hensilli, and Aedes apicoargenteus.
Epidemiology The global prevalence of Zika virus infection has not been widely reported owing to asymptomatic clinical course, clinical resemblance to other infection with other flaviviruses dengue , chikungunya , and difficulty in confirming diagnosis. Courtesy of the CDC. View Media Gallery.
Participatory Epidemiology: Use of Mobile Phones for Community-Based Health Reporting
All countries and territories with active Zika virus transmission. Prognosis Most cases of Zika virus infection are mild and self-limited. Patient Education Certain patients should be educated concerning travel risks associated with Zika virus and prevention of mosquito bites and mosquito-control measures.
Clinical Presentation. Media Gallery. Testing algorithm for pregnant women with history of travel to areas with active Zika virus transmission. Rash in a patient with Zika virus infection. What would you like to print? Hence we welcome reports of high-quality clinical trials, along with major reviews and meta-analyses that provide the strength of evidence that will finally allow the findings of smaller studies to be translated into life-saving decisions. Ultimately, we ask ourselves: does this manuscript constitute a substantial step towards a clear answer to an important global health question?
Much in epidemiology is of corroborative value. Given the bluntness of our toolbox, epidemiological findings must be replicated before they can be considered as evidence for the need to change practice in medicine and public health. We respect that but believe that papers that attempt to corroborate previous findings without taking a substantial step forward, or bringing a new angle to the problem, will have a better home in specialty journals.
We seek to reward innovative and smart explorations of population health data. Sometimes the intellectual excitement that a paper elicits does not come from the sophistication of the methodology but from the clever use of simple methods to reveal a possibly causal association that was hidden from view in previous investigations. Eureka moments exist in epidemiology; we wish to display them prominently in eLife. We recognise and celebrate the fact that global health is now a truly international endeavour, and we are especially keen to receive submissions from the low- and middle-income nations that are under-represented in most journals, including eLife.
In the same vein, we think it stands to reason that papers using new data collected in these countries should normally include co-authors from the countries whose health-related data are the focus of the investigation.
How else could these studies have captured the appropriate context for an in-depth exploration of the research problem? In conclusion, when making decisions about submissions in epidemiology and global health, we look for all the things you would expect to see in papers in a good journal—such as a clear question, clever insights and clear clarity of logic—combined with results and findings that have the potential to improve human health.
Competing interests: The authors declare that no competing interests exist. National Center for Biotechnology Information , U. Your message has been successfully sent to your colleague. After the title, the abstract is the most important public-facing aspect of a paper; it is always freely available, even when the rest of the paper is not. As such, the abstract should convey key methods and results against the background and importance of the study.
This goal can be challenging given the strict limit of words, so we have come up with some guidelines. The abstract serves several purposes. It primarily summarizes your work, both in the print and electronic versions, as well as in indices such as PubMed. It also entices readers to invest time in reading the whole paper. Literature summaries start with reviews of abstracts to select papers that meet inclusion criteria.
For these reasons, the abstract might be the most important writing you will do. Unfortunately, the abstract often receives the least attention. Authors often simply cut and paste key phrases from each section of their main text to stitch together an abstract. To write better abstracts, write them, don't cut and paste them.
Write a first draft before you have written anything else. Then write a second independent draft after you have drafted the other sections. Compare these drafts and keep the best from both. Then start rewriting. As with all writing, revisions lead to the best text. A structured abstract should follow this outline. In the abstract, the Introduction section use a sentence or two to focus on the rationale for the study: what is still unknown in a given area and what the study aims to accomplish.
The Methods should briefly describe the study design and population investigated, and main methods used. The Results section should include a key numerical result or two, as this adds interest; however, beware of the temptation to make sentences unwieldy with a lot of risk estimates and confidence intervals. Have a look at our strategies for presenting numbers in text here.
Finally, the Discussion should provide the take-home message of the study, avoiding per journal policy undue causal language or strictly avoiding public health or policy recommendations. Not all abstracts need be structured; methodology papers, particularly those with less internal structure than a typical outcomes paper, can have an abstract free of the constraint of the sections above.
Register for a free account
Although we do not have a goal for a formal level of readability, the abstract should be as readable as practicable for most readers. Our audience mostly has a background in biomedical sciences, but includes non-epidemiologists. We are also a general interest epidemiology journal, so jargon specific to a topic area should be avoided, especially in the abstract. For these reasons, we are somewhat more strict regarding abbreviations about which you can read more here — in brief, use only the most familiar ones, e.
BMI and CI, but they should be defined on first use and, if possible, avoided entirely, particularly when there is potential ambiguity.
More than once, for example, a paper using the expression 'men who have sex with men' has appeared in the same issue as one that used 'marginal structural models,' and both were abbreviated MSM which has various other meanings as well , so we made sure that this abbreviation was not used at all in either abstract.