Disease Detectives B/C

QuantumLeaper · Post by **QuantumLeaper** » Thu May 12, 2011 5:15 am

I found this description very helpful (it's the Gale Encyclopedia one) because I had the same question myself (first year in Disease Detectives this year). It does define a cross-sectional study as a survey, but it goes into more detail than most definitions I've seen. I hope this helps.

http://www.answers.com/topic/synchronic-study

EpicFailure · Post by **EpicFailure** » Sat May 14, 2011 6:43 am

Thanks, that helped. What are some reasons for missing data?

ptkid · Post by **ptkid** » Sun May 22, 2011 1:27 pm

Did anybody finish the national test? It was 3 scenarios.
I split it and still didn't finish. We didn't finish 1/6th of the test but we still got 15th.

Starapollo1 · Post by **Starapollo1** » Sun May 22, 2011 9:22 pm

The C division one was equally as long... it was a LOT different than the exams I was prepared for! It completely took me off guard and my partner and I did really, really, really, poorly on it. On the other hand it was an incredible test! It was very well thought out and definitely was on topic! Great test.

Infinity Flat · Post by **Infinity Flat** » Sun May 22, 2011 9:55 pm

Starapollo1 wrote:The C division one was equally as long... it was a LOT different than the exams I was prepared for! It completely took me off guard and my partner and I did really, really, really, poorly on it. On the other hand it was an incredible test! It was very well thought out and definitely was on topic! Great test.

The test really was quite nice. I was kicking myself for not bringing a watch, though: I didn't even look at the 3rd scenario until they called 5 minutes.

Could have done a lot better, but I'm still content.

Starapollo1 · Post by **Starapollo1** » Mon May 23, 2011 6:01 am

Infinity Flat wrote:
Starapollo1 wrote:The C division one was equally as long... it was a LOT different than the exams I was prepared for! It completely took me off guard and my partner and I did really, really, really, poorly on it. On the other hand it was an incredible test! It was very well thought out and definitely was on topic! Great test.
The test really was quite nice. I was kicking myself for not bringing a watch, though: I didn't even look at the 3rd scenario until they called 5 minutes. Could have done a lot better, but I'm still content.

I know exactly what you mean! When the one kid asked if he could use his stop watch my partner and I were like "oh wow... we're so stupid..." We ended up only getting through half the test (maybe) ... we ended up with 36th

The Eviscerator · Post by **The Eviscerator** » Mon May 23, 2011 10:41 am

We didn't answer 7 questions or so and ended up with 12th...
I thought the test was really easy, I just didn't have enough time for all of the questions... *sigh*

srsvball95 · Post by **srsvball95** » Mon May 23, 2011 12:18 pm

Yeah, the test was easy, but long. We got 11th, but we didn't finish and I'm pretty mad about that. I didn't even look at the third scenario, since we were working up until they called time.

And it's foodborne again next year, right?

Post by **Luo** » Mon May 23, 2011 12:55 pm

Likewise, our team didn't even get close to finishing. The test wasn't that difficult, but we took way too much time. We ended up 17th.

Epidemiologist · Post by **Epidemiologist** » Mon May 23, 2011 2:40 pm

I don't believe the national test was very long, yes it was 26 pages, but if you properly trained that should be nothing. It was also extremely easy, except for the analysis of EMG testing. Also, you could split it up among your partner. My partner wasn't prepared, but I still finished everything and managed to get 10th place.

Scioly.org

Disease Detectives B/C

Re: Disease Detectives B/C

Re: Disease Detectives B/C

Re: Disease Detectives B/C

Re: Disease Detectives B/C

Re: Disease Detectives B/C

Re: Disease Detectives B/C

Re: Disease Detectives B/C

Re: Disease Detectives B/C

Re: Disease Detectives B/C

Re: Disease Detectives B/C

Connect

Learn

Get Involved

About

Disclaimer