Reference no: EM132224896

Researchers conducted a study to determine if people who used cell phones while driving were more likely to be involved in traffic accidents. They identified drivers that had been involved in 1 or more car accidents in the past 5 years and drivers who had not been in a car accident in the past 5 years. They then surveyed the drivers regarding their history of cell phone use while driving. The study found that 15% of the drivers that had been in an accident and 8% of the drivers that had not been in an accident reported cell phone use while driving. The study found that using cell phones while driving was associated with traffic accidents with a measured odds ratio of 5.2.

Is this an example of a case study, an ecological study, or a case-control study?

Is this study a descriptive or an analytic study? Justify your answer and support it using evidence from the above description of the study.

In your own words interpret the odds ratio reported by this study.

Is the association that was found evidence of a causal relationship? Why or why not?

In the methods section, the researchers noted that the participants that had traffic accidents were selected from hospital admission records and the participants that had not had traffic accidents were selected from among those that had a valid drivers’ license. What type of bias would this introduce into the study (selection bias, observational bias, or confounding)? Explain your reasoning.

In the discussion section, the researchers noted that when they selected participants that had not had a traffic accident for the study, they had not matched them to those that had traffic accidents by any characteristics such as age, gender, race, or occupation. All of these are known risk factors for traffic accidents and are related to how often people use their cell phones. What type of bias would this introduce into the study (selection bias, observational bias, or confounding)? Explain your reasoning.