Qualitative research methods US Medical PG Practice Questions and MCQs
Practice US Medical PG questions for Qualitative research methods. These multiple choice questions (MCQs) cover important concepts and help you prepare for your exams.
Qualitative research methods US Medical PG Question 1: A research group designed a study to investigate the epidemiology of syphilis in the United States. The investigators examined per capita income and rates of syphilis in New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Houston. Data on city-wide syphilis rates was provided by each city's health agency. The investigators ultimately found that the number of new cases of syphilis was higher in low-income neighborhoods. This study is best described as which of the following?
- A. Double-blind clinical trial
- B. Prospective cohort study
- C. Case-control study
- D. Case series
- E. Ecological study (Correct Answer)
Qualitative research methods Explanation: ***Ecological study***
- This study design examines the relationship between **exposure** (per capita income) and **outcome** (syphilis rates) at the **population level** (cities, neighborhoods) rather than at the individual level.
- It uses **aggregate data** from health agencies to identify patterns and correlations, which is characteristic of an ecological study.
*Double-blind clinical trial*
- A double-blind clinical trial is a type of **interventional study** where neither the participants nor the researchers know who is receiving the treatment versus placebo.
- This study is **observational** and does not involve any intervention or blinding.
*Prospective cohort study*
- A prospective cohort study follows **individuals over time** to see who develops a disease based on their exposure status.
- This study does not follow individuals; instead, it looks at **population-level data** at a single point or period.
*Case-control study*
- A case-control study compares individuals with a disease (**cases**) to individuals without the disease (**controls**) and retrospectively looks for differences in their past exposures.
- This study does not identify individual cases and controls or look back at individual exposures.
*Case series*
- A case series describes the characteristics of a group of patients with a particular disease or exposure.
- This study analyzes **population-level income and disease rates**, not detailed clinical information on individual cases.
Qualitative research methods US Medical PG Question 2: A surgeon is interested in studying how different surgical techniques impact the healing of tendon injuries. In particular, he will compare 3 different types of suture repairs biomechanically in order to determine the maximum load before failure of the tendon 2 weeks after repair. He collects data on maximum load for 90 different repaired tendons from an animal model. Thirty tendons were repaired using each of the different suture techniques. Which of the following statistical measures is most appropriate for analyzing the results of this study?
- A. Chi-squared
- B. Wilcoxon rank sum
- C. Pearson r coefficient
- D. Student t-test
- E. ANOVA (Correct Answer)
Qualitative research methods Explanation: ***ANOVA***
- **ANOVA (Analysis of Variance)** is appropriate here because it compares the means of **three or more independent groups** (the three different suture techniques) on a continuous dependent variable (maximum load before failure).
- The study has three distinct repair techniques, each with 30 tendons, making ANOVA suitable for determining if there are statistically significant differences among their mean failure loads.
*Chi-squared*
- The **Chi-squared test** is used for analyzing **categorical data** (frequencies or proportions) to determine if there is an association between two nominal variables.
- This study involves quantitative measurement (maximum load), not categorical data, making Chi-squared inappropriate.
*Wilcoxon rank sum*
- The **Wilcoxon rank sum test** (also known as Mann-Whitney U test) is a **non-parametric test** used to compare two independent groups when the data is not normally distributed or is ordinal.
- While the study has independent groups, it involves three groups, and the dependent variable is continuous, making ANOVA a more powerful and appropriate choice assuming normal distribution.
*Pearson r coefficient*
- The **Pearson r coefficient** measures the **strength and direction of a linear relationship between two continuous variables**.
- This study aims to compare means across different groups, not to determine the correlation between two continuous variables.
*Student t-test*
- The **Student t-test** is used to compare the means of **exactly two groups** (either independent or paired) on a continuous dependent variable.
- This study involves comparing three different suture techniques, not just two, making the t-test unsuitable.
Qualitative research methods US Medical PG Question 3: A 52-year-old man with stage IV melanoma comes to the physician with his wife for a routine follow-up examination. He was recently diagnosed with new bone and brain metastases despite receiving aggressive chemotherapy but has not disclosed this to his wife. He has given verbal consent to discuss his prognosis with his wife and asks the doctor to inform her of his condition because he does not wish to do so himself. She is tearful and has many questions about his condition. Which of the following would be the most appropriate statement by the physician to begin the interview with the patient's wife?
- A. Have you discussed a living will or goals of care together?
- B. We should talk about how we can manage his symptoms with additional chemotherapy.
- C. Why do you think your husband has not discussed his medical condition with you?
- D. What is your understanding of your husband's current condition? (Correct Answer)
- E. Your husband has end-stage cancer, and his prognosis is poor.
Qualitative research methods Explanation: ***What is your understanding of your husband's current condition?***
- This statement initiates the conversation by **assessing the wife's current knowledge** and emotional state, which is crucial for delivering sensitive and appropriate information.
- It allows the physician to tailor the discussion to her specific understanding and concerns, ensuring that information is delivered compassionately and effectively.
*Have you discussed a living will or goals of care together?*
- This question is too abrupt and **premature** as an opening, as the wife is clearly distressed and unaware of the full severity of her husband's condition.
- Discussions about end-of-life planning should only occur after the patient's wife has a clear understanding of the diagnosis and prognosis, and has processed this information.
*Your husband has end-stage cancer, and his prognosis is poor.*
- While factual, this statement is **too blunt and lacks empathy** for an opening, especially given the wife's emotional state and lack of prior knowledge.
- Delivering such devastating news directly without first assessing her understanding or providing context can be traumatic and impede effective communication.
*We should talk about how we can manage his symptoms with additional chemotherapy.*
- This statement implies a focus on further aggressive treatment which may not be appropriate given the **new bone and brain metastases** and aggressive prior chemotherapy, suggesting a limited benefit of more chemotherapy.
- It also **diverts from the primary need to discuss the overall prognosis** and the patient's rapidly declining condition, which the doctor has been asked to convey.
*Why do you think your husband has not discussed his medical condition with you?*
- This question is **accusatory** and places blame on either the patient or the wife, which is inappropriate and unhelpful in a sensitive medical discussion.
- It shifts the focus away from providing medical information and empathy towards a speculative and potentially confrontational topic.
Qualitative research methods US Medical PG Question 4: A recent study attempted to analyze whether increased "patient satisfaction" driven healthcare resulted in increased hospitalization. In this hospital, several of the wards adopted new aspects of "patient satisfaction" driven healthcare, whereas the remainder of the hospital continued to use existing protocols. Baseline population characteristics and demographics were collected at the start of the study. At the end of the following year, hospital use was assessed and compared between the two groups. Which of the following best describes this type of study?
- A. Prospective cohort (Correct Answer)
- B. Cross-sectional study
- C. Retrospective case-control
- D. Prospective case-control
- E. Retrospective cohort
Qualitative research methods Explanation: ***Prospective cohort***
- This study design involves following a group of **exposed individuals (patient satisfaction-driven healthcare)** and a group of **unexposed individuals (existing protocols)** forward in time to observe the development of an outcome (**hospitalization**).
- The exposure status is determined at the **start of the study (baseline)**, and outcomes are measured prospectively over a period, which aligns with observing hospital use over the following year.
*Cross-sectional study*
- A **cross-sectional study** assesses both exposure and outcome simultaneously at a single point in time, providing a snapshot.
- This study design involves follow-up over a year, making it unsuitable for a cross-sectional classification.
*Retrospective case-control*
- A **retrospective case-control study** begins with identifying individuals based on their outcome status (cases with the outcome and controls without the outcome) and then looks back in time to determine past exposures.
- This study starts by defining exposure groups and then follows them to observe future outcomes, which is the opposite of a case-control design.
*Prospective case-control*
- A **prospective case-control study** is a less common and often refers to a nested case-control study within a cohort, where cases and controls are selected from a larger cohort that has been followed prospectively.
- The described study directly follows entire exposed and unexposed groups without specifically selecting cases and controls from a pre-defined cohort.
*Retrospective cohort*
- A **retrospective cohort study** defines cohorts based on past exposures using existing data and then looks back in time to determine outcomes that have already occurred.
- The study explicitly states that hospital use was assessed at the "end of the following year," indicating a forward-looking collection of outcome data, not a retrospective assessment of already recorded outcomes.
Qualitative research methods US Medical PG Question 5: You are currently employed as a clinical researcher working on clinical trials of a new drug to be used for the treatment of Parkinson's disease. Currently, you have already determined the safe clinical dose of the drug in a healthy patient. You are in the phase of drug development where the drug is studied in patients with the target disease to determine its efficacy. Which of the following phases is this new drug currently in?
- A. Phase 4
- B. Phase 1
- C. Phase 2 (Correct Answer)
- D. Phase 0
- E. Phase 3
Qualitative research methods Explanation: ***Phase 2***
- **Phase 2 trials** involve studying the drug in patients with the target disease to assess its **efficacy** and further evaluate safety, typically involving a few hundred patients.
- The question describes a stage after safe dosing in healthy patients (Phase 1) and before large-scale efficacy confirmation (Phase 3), focusing on efficacy in the target population.
*Phase 4*
- **Phase 4 trials** occur **after a drug has been approved** and marketed, monitoring long-term effects, optimal use, and rare side effects in a diverse patient population.
- This phase is conducted post-market approval, whereas the question describes a drug still in development prior to approval.
*Phase 1*
- **Phase 1 trials** primarily focus on determining the **safety and dosage** of a new drug in a **small group of healthy volunteers** (or sometimes patients with advanced disease if the drug is highly toxic).
- The question states that the safe clinical dose in a healthy patient has already been determined, indicating that Phase 1 has been completed.
*Phase 0*
- **Phase 0 trials** are exploratory, very early-stage studies designed to confirm that the drug reaches the target and acts as intended, typically involving a very small number of doses and participants.
- These trials are conducted much earlier in the development process, preceding the determination of safe clinical doses and large-scale efficacy studies.
*Phase 3*
- **Phase 3 trials** are large-scale studies involving hundreds to thousands of patients to confirm **efficacy**, monitor side effects, compare it to commonly used treatments, and collect information that will allow the drug to be used safely.
- While Phase 3 does assess efficacy, it follows Phase 2 and is typically conducted on a much larger scale before submitting for regulatory approval.
Qualitative research methods US Medical PG Question 6: A 28-year-old male presents to his primary care physician with complaints of intermittent abdominal pain and alternating bouts of constipation and diarrhea. His medical chart is not significant for any past medical problems or prior surgeries. He is not prescribed any current medications. Which of the following questions would be the most useful next question in eliciting further history from this patient?
- A. "Does the diarrhea typically precede the constipation, or vice-versa?"
- B. "Is the diarrhea foul-smelling?"
- C. "Please rate your abdominal pain on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the worst pain of your life"
- D. "Are the symptoms worse in the morning or at night?"
- E. "Can you tell me more about the symptoms you have been experiencing?" (Correct Answer)
Qualitative research methods Explanation: ***Can you tell me more about the symptoms you have been experiencing?***
- This **open-ended question** encourages the patient to provide a **comprehensive narrative** of their symptoms, including details about onset, frequency, duration, alleviating/aggravating factors, and associated symptoms, which is crucial for diagnosis.
- In a patient presenting with vague, intermittent symptoms like alternating constipation and diarrhea, allowing them to elaborate freely can reveal important clues that might not be captured by more targeted questions.
*Does the diarrhea typically precede the constipation, or vice-versa?*
- While knowing the sequence of symptoms can be helpful in understanding the **pattern of bowel dysfunction**, it is a very specific question that might overlook other important aspects of the patient's experience.
- It prematurely narrows the focus without first obtaining a broad understanding of the patient's overall symptomatic picture.
*Is the diarrhea foul-smelling?*
- Foul-smelling diarrhea can indicate **malabsorption** or **bacterial overgrowth**, which are important to consider in some gastrointestinal conditions.
- However, this is a **specific symptom inquiry** that should follow a more general exploration of the patient's symptoms, as it may not be relevant if other crucial details are missed.
*Please rate your abdominal pain on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the worst pain of your life*
- Quantifying pain intensity is useful for assessing the **severity of discomfort** and monitoring changes over time.
- However, for a patient with intermittent rather than acute, severe pain, understanding the **character, location, and triggers** of the pain is often more diagnostically valuable than just a numerical rating initially.
*Are the symptoms worse in the morning or at night?*
- Diurnal variation can be relevant in certain conditions, such as inflammatory bowel diseases where nocturnal symptoms might be more concerning, or functional disorders whose symptoms might be stress-related.
- This is another **specific question** that should come after gathering a more complete initial picture of the patient's symptoms to ensure no key information is overlooked.
Qualitative research methods US Medical PG Question 7: During identification of severely decomposed remains, which of the following methods provides the most reliable means of positive identification?
- A. Birthmarks
- B. Facial features
- C. DNA analysis (Correct Answer)
- D. Personal effects
Qualitative research methods Explanation: ***DNA analysis***
- **DNA analysis** remains viable even in significantly degraded samples due to the stability and uniqueness of the genetic code, making it the most reliable method for positive identification of severely decomposed remains.
- It provides a definitive match that is **scientifically verifiable** and rarely subject to error when compared to ante-mortem samples or close relatives.
*Birthmarks*
- **Birthmarks** are soft tissue characteristics that often degrade or become indistinguishable in severely decomposed remains.
- Their presence and appearance can change over time or be obscured by **decomposition processes**, making them unreliable for identification in such cases.
*Facial features*
- **Facial features** rapidly deteriorate and distort after death, especially in severely decomposed remains, making visual recognition impossible.
- The soft tissues of the face are among the first to undergo **autolysis** and putrefaction.
*Personal effects*
- While **personal effects** (like jewelry or clothing) can provide circumstantial evidence, they do not offer positive identification of the individual's remains.
- These items can be easily lost, misplaced, or exchanged, and they do not directly identify the **biological individual**.
Qualitative research methods US Medical PG Question 8: A research team has data from three completed studies on statin use and Alzheimer's disease: Study A (case-control, OR=0.6, n=500), Study B (retrospective cohort, RR=0.7, n=10,000), and Study C (RCT with cognitive decline as secondary endpoint, RR=0.9, n=2,000). The case-control study used prevalent cases, the cohort study had significant loss to follow-up in the unexposed group, and the RCT was underpowered for cognitive outcomes. Synthesize the evidence to determine the most reliable conclusion about the association.
- A. The RCT provides the strongest evidence despite being underpowered
- B. The retrospective cohort study offers the best balance of validity and precision (Correct Answer)
- C. Case-control study is most reliable due to efficient rare outcome assessment
- D. Evidence is contradictory and no conclusion can be drawn
- E. Meta-analysis of all three studies provides the most accurate estimate
Qualitative research methods Explanation: ***The retrospective cohort study offers the best balance of validity and precision***
- Despite **differential loss to follow-up** in the unexposed, the very large **sample size (n=10,000)** provides high **statistical power** and precision compared to the other studies.
- Cohort studies establish a **temporal sequence** (statin use before disease onset), which is superior to cross-sectional or prevalent case-control designs for causal inference.
*The RCT provides the strongest evidence despite being underpowered*
- While **Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs)** are higher in the evidence hierarchy, an **underpowered** study lacks the precision to detect a true effect, increasing the risk of a **Type II error**.
- Since cognitive decline was only a **secondary endpoint**, the study may not have been designed or followed long enough to assess Alzheimer's disease progression accurately.
*Case-control study is most reliable due to efficient rare outcome assessment*
- The use of **prevalent cases** instead of incident cases introduces **Neyman bias (survival bias)**, as it only includes patients who survived long enough to be studied.
- Case-control studies are prone to **recall bias** and cannot definitively prove that statin use preceded the onset of cognitive decline.
*Evidence is contradictory and no conclusion can be drawn*
- While the results vary, researchers can still synthesize evidence by weighing studies based on their **methodological quality**, **sample size**, and **bias profile**.
- A conclusion can be drawn by acknowledging the **conservative estimate** (bias toward the null) in the cohort study which still suggested a protective effect.
*Meta-analysis of all three studies provides the most accurate estimate*
- **Meta-analysis** of studies with fundamentally different designs (RCT, Cohort, Case-Control) and significant **methodological limitations** can lead to inaccurate pooled results ("garbage in, garbage out").
- Combining studies with different measures of association (OR vs RR) and distinct biases like **survival bias** and **differential attrition** increases **heterogeneity**.
Qualitative research methods US Medical PG Question 9: A public health department needs to determine whether a cluster of birth defects in a county is associated with industrial pollution. They have limited resources, the suspected exposure occurred 3-5 years ago, and the outcome is rare (15 cases identified). Multiple potential confounders exist including maternal age, socioeconomic status, and prenatal care access. The community demands rapid answers. Evaluate the most appropriate initial study design considering feasibility, ethics, and scientific validity.
- A. Prospective cohort study of pregnant women with exposure monitoring
- B. Randomized controlled trial comparing exposed and unexposed areas
- C. Case-control study with multiple control groups and confounder adjustment (Correct Answer)
- D. Ecologic study comparing county-level pollution and birth defect rates
- E. Cross-sectional survey of current pollution levels and birth outcomes
Qualitative research methods Explanation: ***Case-control study with multiple control groups and confounder adjustment***
- A **case-control study** is the gold standard for investigating **rare outcomes** (only 15 cases identified) because it identifies subjects based on disease status rather than waiting for it to develop.
- This design is highly efficient for **retrospective exposures** that occurred years ago, allows for **rapid results** with limited resources, and can adjust for multiple **confounders** like maternal age and SES through statistical modeling.
*Prospective cohort study of pregnant women with exposure monitoring*
- This design is inappropriate for **rare outcomes** because it would require an massive sample size and many years of follow-up before seeing enough cases to be statistically significant.
- It cannot address a **past exposure** (3-5 years ago) as it follows subjects forward in time from the point of current exposure.
*Randomized controlled trial comparing exposed and unexposed areas*
- It is fundamentally **unethical** to intentionally expose human populations to potentially harmful industrial pollutants in an experimental setting.
- RCTs are used for **interventions** (like new drugs) rather than investigating the etiology of environmental health hazards.
*Ecologic study comparing county-level pollution and birth defect rates*
- This design is prone to the **ecologic fallacy**, where associations found at the population level may not hold true for individuals within that population.
- It cannot adjust for **individual-level confounders** such as personal prenatal care access or specific maternal age, making the results scientifically weaker for the community's needs.
*Cross-sectional survey of current pollution levels and birth outcomes*
- This design suffers from **temporal ambiguity**, as it measures exposure and outcome simultaneously, failing to confirm that pollution Exposure preceded the birth defects.
- Current pollution levels may not accurately reflect the **historical exposure** that occurred during the critical window of embryogenesis 3-5 years ago.
Qualitative research methods US Medical PG Question 10: A pharmaceutical company wants to evaluate a new anticoagulant's effectiveness in preventing stroke in atrial fibrillation patients. They have limited funding and need results within 2 years. The drug has promising phase 2 data. Concurrent medications and comorbidities vary widely in the target population. The company must choose between a pragmatic trial in 50 community hospitals or an explanatory trial at 3 academic centers with strict protocols. Evaluate which design best serves both scientific and practical objectives.
- A. Cluster randomized trial across academic and community sites
- B. Explanatory trial provides definitive efficacy data with maximum internal validity
- C. Pragmatic trial in community settings with broad inclusion criteria (Correct Answer)
- D. Sequential design starting with explanatory trial then pragmatic trial
- E. Adaptive trial design with interim efficacy monitoring
Qualitative research methods Explanation: ***Pragmatic trial in community settings with broad inclusion criteria***
- A **pragmatic trial** evaluates **effectiveness** in real-world clinical practice, making it ideal for a target population with diverse comorbidities and concurrent medications.
- It offers higher **external validity** (generalizability) and is often more feasible and cost-effective within a short timeline compared to highly controlled designs.
*Cluster randomized trial across academic and community sites*
- While it group-randomizes sites, this design is more complex to coordinate and may not be necessary if the goal is individual-level **stroke prevention** results.
- It does not specifically address the need for **broad inclusion criteria** or the limited budget as effectively as a standard pragmatic design.
*Explanatory trial provides definitive efficacy data with maximum internal validity*
- **Explanatory trials** test **efficacy** under ideal, highly controlled conditions, which may not reflect the actual benefit in the general population with comorbidities.
- Strict protocols at only 3 centers lead to low **generalizability** and slower recruitment, potentially exceeding the 2-year deadline.
*Sequential design starting with explanatory trial then pragmatic trial*
- A **sequential design** would require significantly more time and **funding** than the current two-year budget constraints allow.
- Since the drug already has promising **Phase 2 data**, moving directly to an effectiveness-focused pragmatic trial is a more strategic use of resources.
*Adaptive trial design with interim efficacy monitoring*
- **Adaptive designs** allow for modifications based on interim data but are statistically complex and often more **expensive** to manage.
- While scientifically rigorous, it does not prioritize the need for **real-world effectiveness** data in community settings requested by the scenario.
More Qualitative research methods US Medical PG questions available in the OnCourse app. Practice MCQs, flashcards, and get detailed explanations.
