Research QuestionHealth Outcome of InterestExposure(s) of Interest
Diagnostic Criteria for Cases
Case AscertainmentNumber of Cases
Control PopulationType (s) /Method (s) of Data Collection
Type of Data Analysis
Results/Main Findings of StudyAssessment of Bias
Assessment of Confounders
CommentsCase-Control Study
Article Citation in APA format:
Lamontagne F. et al. (2008). Pneumococcal vaccination and risk of myocardial infarction. Canadian Medical Association Journal 179 (8) 773-777.
Research Question:
Does immunization against S. Pneumonia linked to a reduced threat of myocardial infarction?
Health Outcome of Interest:
There is an impact of pneumococcal immunization in combating myocardial infarction.
Exposure(s) of Interest:
The interest has a high exposure to pneumococcal immunization. This means that atherosclerosis disease has an impact on the death rate in developed countries.
Diagnostic Criteria for Cases:
The pneumococcal vaccination should be applied to the exposed group.
Case Ascertainment
This is a multi-site study. In this case the steps of accessing the journal include the opening of a students account at Walden University. The next step involves opening the ebscohost online library resource to access the journal.
Number of Cases
The total number of participants was 43209 patients. This formed the population of the study. The sample size was 3996 individuals. They were selected based on a selection criteria. Therefore the number of cases that did not participate was 39213 patients. The cases that did not participate were excluded based on the criteria of having a certain age. In addition patients who were not admitted in the chosen surgical department or had experienced atherosclerotic disease were excluded. Patients who experienced myocardial infarction before the selection date and those who did not have health insurance cards were also excluded (Lamontagne et al 2008).
Control Population:
The control population included 19480 patients and only 3996 patients were included in the analysis. The control cases included patients who experienced risk factors of cardiovascular infection. The control cases had no diagnosis of atherosclerotic disease. In addition the control cases had not experienced myocardial infarction when the study was conducted (Lamontagne et al 2008).
Type (s) /Method (s) of Data Collection
The data were collected from medical records belonging to the Centre informatis Derec harsh valuative en services et soins de sant of the Centre hospitalier universitaire de Sherbrooke and Logivac. There was no procedure applied to validate the data used because the databases used were reliable (Lamontagne et al 2008).
Type of Data Analysis:
The data were analyzed using correlation and regression models. The correlation coefficient as well as Type 1 and type II errors were obtained. The Odds ratio (OR) was also obtained. A logistic regression model was developed. The Adjusted OR and the confidence interval were computed. Invariable and multivariable analysis were developed to include the covariables provided during the analysis. A multivariable model was developed using the available covariates. In addition a single step model was applied (Lamontagne et al 2008).
Results/Main Findings of Study:
It was established that the likelihood of vaccination was more for the controls than that of the cases. Chronic renal failure had a higher probability of occurrence in cases than in the controls. A similar pattern was experienced for diabetes. The application of pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine had a mean time of 1.81 years and a standard deviation of 1.02. The cases had a mean interval of 1.50 years between exposure and vaccine. The standard deviation was 1.03 years (Lamontagne et al 2008).
Assessment of Bias:
The selection of the sample was not biased because a clear guide was provided during the sampling process. All sampled cases and controls had the qualifications required. The cases and controls that were excluded had failed to meet the minimum characteristics provided (Merrill & Timmreck 2006).
Assessment of Confounders:
The confounders were provided to ensure that the research was effective. The dependent and independent variables were provided alongside other supportive variables. The confounders improved the results of the research and this made the entire process reliable (Merrill & Timmreck 2006).
Comments:
It is possible to identify the behavior of cases because the controls provide the characteristics of the cases. The sample selected help in developing inferences about the population of study. This shows that the research was reliable since the results were obtained from a reliable process.

Looking for a Similar Assignment? Order now and Get 10% Discount! Use Coupon Code "Newclient"