Disease Detectives B/C

[QuantumTech]

Hello there! I am trying to get a head start over the summer on Disease Detectives Division C. Anybody know about how much of the test is composed of statistical analysis like Chi Tests etc. ? I know the official guide sheet says less than 10%, but sometimes the test makers do it differently.

[bernard]

Hello there! I am trying to get a head start over the summer on Disease Detectives Division C. Anybody know about how much of the test is composed of statistical analysis like Chi Tests etc. ? I know the official guide sheet says less than 10%, but sometimes the test makers do it differently.

You kind of answered your question—it depends on the test maker. In tests I've taken, I haven't seen it a lot, probably less than 10% as you said.

[QuantumTech]

Anybody know if the Disease Detectives CD on soinc.org is useful or not? I want to practice some more tests besides the ones on scioly.org.

[sciolyboy123]

I know that for Div. B, it was pretty helpful. Not sure about Div. C.

[SOnerd]

In Disease Detectives this year, I noticed that the test I took at Nats was significantly different from the one I took at any other competition (invites, state, regionals). It required much more critical thinking and problem solving skills than just memorization of vocab words and RR/OR formulas.

Just out of curiosity, have any of you guys who took the test at Nats noticed the same thing? It almost seemed like the test was written for an entirely different event at Nationals than at any other tournament. (though I did feel that the Nats test was very well-written and challenging)

[ptkid]

In Disease Detectives this year, I noticed that the test I took at Nats was significantly different from the one I took at any other competition (invites, state, regionals). It required much more critical thinking and problem solving skills than just memorization of vocab words and RR/OR formulas.

Just out of curiosity, have any of you guys who took the test at Nats noticed the same thing? It almost seemed like the test was written for an entirely different event at Nationals than at any other tournament. (though I did feel that the Nats test was very well-written and challenging)

Disease Detectives at nationals is always written with lengthy case studies that require critical thinking and problem solving skills in relation to the knowledge that can be memorized (so you are correct in your thoughts on the test). The way the event is run at the National Tournament is the way that the initial event rule writers and the national supervisors have wished it to be run at every other level of competition. And, because it takes a large amount of effort and time to create the test in the same manner as the test at nationals, I've rarely seen tests like it at any other level. So, just continue to expect the great difference between the tests in all of your years competing.

[sciolyboy123]

Speaking of the nats test, I really liked it. It wasn't too crazy or hard so it was kind of ideal.

[GrayEpi]

ptkid is right on. I have been involved with writing every national event except one. The focus is on critical thinking and the ability to solve problems. We figure that competitors will have been tested on the basics at the regional and state levels (we are working with National to bring about some structure and standardization at that level). By the time you get to the nationals, you should not just to know something but to be able to use what you know to solve a problem and make a decision. You should also know what tool to use when faced with a problem.

They are developed by a team at CDC and we put 100's of person-hours into writing each national event. We will be starting on the 2016 event in Aug or Sept. Once it is done it will be reviewed by 4-5 other people to make sure it is clearly written and makes sense. Having said that, there are a lot of really good folks at the regional and state levels and the situation is much better than it used to be. We sort of look to them to focus on the basics and they usually do a good job of it.

wrto statistics - we have developed some guidelines and suggestions that National should be passing along this summer. Again - we don't control what goes on at the regional or state levels but we can make suggestions. This is not the Math Olympics but statistics is an important tool that we use to do our work. You should know what numbers go into the cells of a 2X2 table, what tests to use and how to interpret and explain the results. You should not have to spend a lot of time doing complicated or lengthy calculations (i.e., determine the variance for a bunch of observations) although, if given means, variances, and sample size along with formulas, you should be able to calculate statistics. Since most of us use computers - you should be able to interpret a simple printout. CDC has a free software package - EpiInfo that has a lot of good information and training videos. Statistics should be a minor part of the event.

If you are told that the relative risk was 3.2 and that the 95% confidence intervals were 1.4-5.1, you should be able to convert into a sentence that your classmates would understand. Something like - "We found that the exposed group was 3.2 times more likely to have the outcome than the unexposed group. However, this is an estimate and the exposed group is between 1.4 and 5.1 times more likely to have the outcome than the unexposed group"

Hope this is helpful. You folks really are impressive. Hang in there. The light seldom goes on the first time but it will go on.

Sciolyboy - glad you liked the national this year.