share email twitter ⋅ join discord whatsapp(2ck)
free120  nbme24  nbme23  nbme22  nbme21  nbme20  nbme19  nbme18  nbme17  nbme16  nbme15  nbme13 

NBME 23 Answers

nbme23/Block 4/Question#12 (48.2 difficulty score)
Investigators conduct a prospective, ...
Strength of association, temporal relationship, dose-response gradientπŸ”
tags:

Login to comment/vote.


 +9 
submitted by rainlad(21),

my approach to this question was to eliminate all the answer choices that mentioned specificity or sensitivity, since the data here did not provide information about any sort of screening test.

that left me with two possible answer choices: I eliminated the one about consistency of other studies, since no other studies were mentioned in the question stem.

not sure if I oversimplified things, but it led me to the right answer!

makinallkindzofgainz  this is exactly how I reasoned through it. Were we correct in our line of thinking? We'll never knooooow +  
qball  But will you ever know on the real thing? +1  
drdoom  but will you ever know in real life? you may do the right thing (given time constraints, & information available), but outcome is bad; maybe you do the wrong thing, but the outcome is good (despite your decision). how to know the difference? +3  



 +7 
submitted by usmle11a(73),
unscramble the site ⋅ remove ads ⋅ become a member ($39/month)

ugys watch htsi : s=Gsv?uebtym./hwu/.TpwstcoKutu:/otohowwYnca

aywany .sp( i gto it orgwn)

)A spenssooe-erd = alcgbioilo .itiualpslyib .ps ewmoohs .uqela )B C) E) vsieinstty;i ron )wgD ym ne;swar isecnonycst of ethro utseids ( it tnwas pidpeal to rehto iutm)imesonc

usmle11a  guys watch this : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TnuosYuKGos anyway (p.s i got it wrong) A) dose-response = biological plausibility. p.s somehow equal. B) C) E) sensitivity; wrong D) my answer; consistency of other studies ( it wasnt applied to other communities) +2  
usmle11a  guys watch this : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TnuosYuKGos anyway (p.s i got it wrong) A) dose-response = biological plausibility. p.s somehow equal. B) C) E) sensitivity; wrong D) my answer; consistency of other studies ( it wasnt applied to other communities) +  
stemcellpsc  wouldn't D be also true based on this video? +  



 +1 
submitted by docred123(6),
unscramble the site ⋅ remove ads ⋅ become a member ($39/month)

Can meesnoo eaepls futerrh nlxaiep isht tinoqsu?e hWat oliibatsattcsi sslnayia ulhsdo I eb tignihnk a?uotb

vshummy  I got this wrong but best I could come up with was this was about Bradford Hill Criteria for establishing causality. And of the 9 included, F has the most that are actually included in the information given to us. I chose D but I think since we don't know about other study results, we can't include it as directly answering the question about *this* study. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradford_Hill_criteria Someone double check me here: A: biologic plausibility is a weak point in the criteria, according to the wiki. Also probably not true in regards to this study. B: Sensitivity is not part of the criteria C: " " D: We don't know about consistency E: " B " +26  
mousie  Found this ... still confused about why A and D are wrong though... https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/534/under-what-conditions-does-correlation-imply-causation +1  
2zanzibar  The three criteria for causality are: 1) empirical association (i.e. strength of association; a change in independent variable correlates or is associated with a change in dependent variable), 2) time order (i.e. temporal relationship; the independent variable must come before change in the dependent variable, or plainly stated, cause must come before effect). and 3) nonspuriousness (i.e. dose-response gradient; the relationship between 2 variables is due to a direct relationship between the two, not because of the actions of changes in a third variable... this can be evinced by a dose-dependent response). +9  



 +0 
submitted by fexx(14),

wtf kinda question was this? where the hell am i even going to use these concepts in medicine?!




 +0 
submitted by brise(44),

I chose anything that would help show a relationship strength: got rid of anything with specificity and sensitivity in it. Leaving only D and F: Temporal relationship sounds more in line with relationship than consistency of other studied. Also how would the consistency of other studies prove anything for the relationship between intervention and child language score in this study?