Am J Epidemiol. 2022 Jun 27;191(7):1174-1179. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwac056.
Nearly every introductory epidemiology course begins with a focus on person, place, and time, the key components of descriptive epidemiology. And yet in our experience, introductory epidemiology courses were the last time we spent any significant amount of training time focused on descriptive epidemiology. This gave us the impression that descriptive epidemiology does not suffer from bias and is less impactful than causal epidemiology. Descriptive epidemiology may also suffer from a lack of prestige in academia and may be more difficult to fund. We believe this does a disservice to the field and slows progress towards goals of improving population health and ensuring equity in health. The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) outbreak and subsequent coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic have highlighted the importance of descriptive epidemiology in responding to serious public health crises. In this commentary, we make the case for renewed focus on the importance of descriptive epidemiology in the epidemiology curriculum using SARS-CoV-2 as a motivating example. The framework for error we use in etiological research can be applied in descriptive research to focus on both systematic and random error. We use the current pandemic to illustrate differences between causal and descriptive epidemiology and areas where descriptive epidemiology can have an important impact.
几乎每一门入门级的流行病学课程都从人、地、时这三个关键因素开始,这也是描述性流行病学的主要组成部分。但根据我们的经验,在入门级的流行病学课程中,我们花费了大量时间来专门学习描述性流行病学。这给我们留下了这样一种印象,即描述性流行病学不受偏见影响,其影响力不如因果关系流行病学。描述性流行病学在学术界可能也缺乏声望,并且更难获得资金。我们认为,这对该领域不利,阻碍了改善人口健康和确保健康公平目标的实现。严重急性呼吸系统综合征冠状病毒 2(SARS-CoV-2)的爆发和随后的 2019 年冠状病毒病大流行凸显了描述性流行病学在应对严重公共卫生危机方面的重要性。在这篇评论中,我们以 SARS-CoV-2 为实例,提出在流行病学课程中重新关注描述性流行病学重要性的理由。我们在病因研究中使用的错误框架也可以应用于描述性研究,以关注系统误差和随机误差。我们利用当前的大流行来举例说明因果关系和描述性流行病学之间的区别,以及描述性流行病学可以产生重要影响的领域。