For the remaining questions: Glioblastoma is a type of brain cancer. The annual incidence rate of Glioblastoma in Orange County is about three new cases per 100,000 people at risk. Your friend in the UCI MD/PhD program is very interested in Glioblastoma. She has a hunch that using cell phones without a headset increases risk of Glioblastoma. She asks your advice on designing an epidemiologic study to gather evidence about her hunch. Maybe this could be her PhD thesis. The study population is defined as Orange County, California. The exposure is cell-phone use without a headset and the outcome is Glioblastoma. The study must take no longer than three years to complete. She has some funding for research, but it is not a lot of money. She is trying to decide between a Case-Control or a Cohort study.
Which of the two seems better to you on the basis of each of the following, and why?
3) Is case-control or cohort study better in terms of 'Rareness' of the outcome? [ 2 points -1 for decision between case-control or cohort, 1 for explaining why]
4) Is case-control or cohort study better in terms of 'Rareness' of the exposure [2 points -1 for decision between case-control or cohort, 1 for explaining why]
5) Is case-control or cohort study better in terms of time to complete (the study)? [ 2 points -1 for decision between case-control or cohort, 1 for explaining why]
6) Is case-control or cohort study better in terms of assuring 'Temporality'? [2 points -1 for decision between case-control or cohort, 1 for explaining why]