Skip to main content
MedVellum
QuestionsVideosPricing

MedVellum

Fellowship exam preparation across every specialty: source-verified topics, questions in every format, and videos.

Product

  • Specialties
  • Questions
  • Videos
  • Exam tools
  • Pricing

Verification & policy

  • Verified register
  • Editorial policy
  • Privacy
  • Terms

Account

  • Sign in
  • Create account
  • Dashboard
  • Account & billing

© 2026 MedVellum. For education only — not a substitute for clinical judgement.

llms.txtPsychiatry LLM catalogSitemap

Psych TopicsFoundations — epidemiologic methods for psychiatry

Psych · Foundations — epidemiologic methods for psychiatry

Epidemiologic methods for psychiatry

Also known as Psychiatric epidemiology methods · Incidence and prevalence · Person-time · Attributable risk · Population attributable fraction · Confounding · Effect modification · Survey sampling · Screening epidemiology · Causal inference · Standardisation of rates

Exam-exhaustive epidemiologic methods for FRANZCP and MRCPsych: frequency measures (incidence, prevalence, person-time), association and impact (RR, OR, RD, AR, PAF), bias/confounding/effect modification, survey design, screening metrics and Wilson–Jungner-style criteria, standardisation, and causal language (Hill, DAG awareness). Distinct from study-design taxonomy, pure biostat drills, and public-mental-health service planning.

medium16 referencesUpdated 26 July 202615 min readVerification in progress

Practise this topic

  • 10 MCQs

Your progress

Saved on this device.

Practise this topic10 MCQs with explanations

Target exams

FRANZCPMRCPsychABPNMD-DNBNEET-SS

Red flags

  • Using lifetime prevalence or hospital admission rates to claim current community need
  • Calling a cross-sectional association causal without temporality and alternative explanations
  • Reading OR as RR when the outcome is common
  • Quoting PAF without causal assumptions or with naive summing of correlated factors past 100%
  • Community screening claims that ignore base-rate collapse of PPV
  • Adjusting for a mediator and declaring the exposure harmless
On this page
Study tools

Your progress

Saved on this device.

Practise this topic10 MCQs with explanations

Target exams

FRANZCPMRCPsychABPNMD-DNBNEET-SS

Red flags

  • Using lifetime prevalence or hospital admission rates to claim current community need
  • Calling a cross-sectional association causal without temporality and alternative explanations
  • Reading OR as RR when the outcome is common
  • Quoting PAF without causal assumptions or with naive summing of correlated factors past 100%
  • Community screening claims that ignore base-rate collapse of PPV
  • Adjusting for a mediator and declaring the exposure harmless
The one-line answer

Epidemiologic method is the discipline of the denominator. Say who was counted, over what time, with what case definition; choose incidence or prevalence deliberately; separate association (RR, OR, RD) from impact (AR, PAF) which needs a causal licence; name selection, information and confounding before you argue policy; and never let a base rate be smuggled out of a screening claim.[1][2][8][11][15]

Meet the paper

In 2004 the WHO World Mental Health Survey Consortium published face-to-face interviews with 60,463 adults across 14 countries. Twelve-month prevalence of any disorder ranged from 4.3% in Shanghai to 26.4% in the United States — a six-fold spread, using the same instrument, in the same three years.[15]

So which is it: is Shanghai six times healthier, or is something in the method doing the work? That single question is the whole of this topic. Case definition, instrument version, severity threshold, recall window, response rate, cultural idiom of distress, and stigma-driven refusal all move a prevalence estimate — before any biology gets a vote.[1][15]

And the same surveys carry the number that funds services. Between 35.5% and 50.3% of serious cases in developed countries, and 76.3% to 85.4% in less-developed countries, received no treatment in the preceding 12 months. That is a treatment-gap argument built entirely on getting the denominator right.[15]

Etymology for viva gold: epidemiology is Greek epi plus demos plus logos — "the study of what is upon the people". The unit of analysis is baked into the word: it was never about one patient.[1]

Psychiatry Fellowship Pro

Continue reading

You have read the opening of this topic. The complete unit — every section and its primary-source references — is part of the Psychiatry Fellowship fellowship library.

Sign in to continueSee pricing
References16ShowHide
  1. [1]Grimes DA, Schulz KF An overview of clinical research: the lay of the land Lancet, 2002.PMID 11809203
  2. [2]Grimes DA, Schulz KF Bias and causal associations in observational research Lancet, 2002.PMID 11812579
  3. [3]Grimes DA, Schulz KF Cohort studies: marching towards outcomes Lancet, 2002.PMID 11830217
  4. [4]Grimes DA, Schulz KF Case-control studies: research in reverse Lancet, 2002.PMID 11844534
  5. [5]Hill AB The environment and disease: association or causation? Proc R Soc Med, 1965.PMID 14283879
  6. [6]von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP; STROBE Initiative The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies Lancet, 2007.PMID 18064739
  7. [7]Sackett DL Bias in analytic research J Chronic Dis, 1979.PMID 447779
  8. [8]Rockhill B, Newman B, Weinberg C Use and misuse of population attributable fractions Am J Public Health, 1998.PMID 9584027
  9. [9]Greenland S, Pearl J, Robins JM Causal diagrams for epidemiologic research Epidemiology, 1999.PMID 9888278
  10. [10]Altman DG, Bland JM Diagnostic tests. 1: Sensitivity and specificity BMJ, 1994.PMID 8019315
  11. [11]Altman DG, Bland JM Diagnostic tests 2: Predictive values BMJ, 1994.PMID 8038641
  12. [12]Andermann A, Blancquaert I, Beauchamp S, Déry V Revisiting Wilson and Jungner in the genomic age: a review of screening criteria over the past 40 years Bull World Health Organ, 2008.PMID 18438522
  13. [13]Rose G Sick individuals and sick populations Int J Epidemiol, 2001.PMID 11416056
  14. [14]Kessler RC, Berglund P, Demler O, Jin R, Merikangas KR, Walters EE Lifetime prevalence and age-of-onset distributions of DSM-IV disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication Arch Gen Psychiatry, 2005.PMID 15939837
  15. [15]Demyttenaere K, Bruffaerts R, Posada-Villa J, et al. Prevalence, severity, and unmet need for treatment of mental disorders in the World Health Organization World Mental Health Surveys JAMA, 2004.PMID 15173149
  16. [16]Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, et al. STARD 2015: an updated list of essential items for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies BMJ, 2015.PMID 26511519

Test yourself

Practise what you just read

  • 10 MCQs
Psychiatry Fellowship Pro

$29/ monthor $279 / year

The complete Psychiatry Fellowship library, every exam format, one subscription.

  • Complete library for one chosen specialty
  • Timed MCQ mock exams and spaced review
  • Clinical cases & cross-table vivas
See pricingSign in
PreviousElimination disorders: enuresis and encopresisChild and adolescent psychiatry — elimination disordersNextEpidemiology and public mental healthProfessional practice — epidemiology and public mental health