An neitpalexmer dniegs or meaenrltiexp utsdy must veha an retviiontenn, by .niotidienf es-lCnrcooat udtsise ear oalinoabsvter tessdui, tno lr.aieemnxtpe hisT tqeousni is ltenlchyaci rcconeir.t hyeT deawtn to kmea a ptoni ahtt tcale-osronc dseuits era meit dan tcos fitecienf incse hyet 'ndto iurerqe glowlfoin tasnipte vore miet or yan euoersrcs esibsed ierwngagertnegi/ivh .mitonofarni sCae rsseei dcuol ont etst hits hyt.hosespi
Asl,o het iowrgnd tasaeso"cdi wti an eaicredsn s"irk wtoamehs sdallue ot ctansero-ocl ssdtieu loyn ingavh hte lyatiib to nidf sodd fo an osoatnsiisac teweebn uoxeersp adn ocot,eum btu nto silsbehta alcusa apei.srthniol
I duwo od a prsovrtteciee hrootc h.eer I ntd'o hintk siht eqisnuot si etrocrc dna veprsiod too iettll ftmrnioanio ot egt het rccrtoe wsne.ra Tme"i tein"ifcef si eth aroptne wdro ehre tbu tyeh mpilsy t'idnd nocrsdei ttha tereesvtproic rhooct ludow be a eettrb nsedgi rhee as olng sa teh laairevbs rea ded.co
I think something not mentioned yet is the fact that odds ratio can be used to estimate relative risk in RARE diseases as per the Rare Disease Assumption (where disease prevalence is <10%). Although the cancer in this question is described as "common," (common relative to other cancers), the cancer is still probably rare overall.
I think the key on this question is recognizing how much "most time-efficient" jumps out in the question stem - a pretty unique thing to be specifically asking. Going off that and the fact they want to look at exposure -> outcome, by far the fastest approach would be to find people who currently have the dz in question and then just ask them if they have a previous exposure aka case-control.
If it had stated a 'Rare Cancer' I would have thought case control. But it said common cancer.... Any thoughts on this?
I knthi yke hree is ythe era vgiiitsnaetgn teh ospsteyhhi fo tmaonum fo ercanniis ertaw nasrseeic SIKR fo c.r.n.ce.a tsbe ayw ot uraemse risk is caes notlc.or