Epi in the News

1. prevalence. the denominator is young people (who was surveyed). the numerator: cases of the denominator reporting negative impact in their sleep by the internet and digital devices, reporting they would like to spend less time on their devices, reporting a positive impact on relationships by being online (respectively)

2.
reporting hate speech online/ young lgbt people and reporting hate speech online/young heterosexual
RR= >2

3. Outcome? i guess hate speech online?

4. Cross sectional

5. young people from the UK, defined as those aged between eight and 25,

6. We are not allocating any exposure because it is not ethic to expose young people to negative things like hate speech online for instance

1. Prevalence figures from a digital youth index study. Denominator: total number of children and young people (aged 8 - 25) surveyed who use the internet in the UK. Numerator: number of participants who were negatively or positively impacted by the internet.

2. Numerator group 1: number of young LGBTQ+ people experiencing hate speech online. Denominator group 1: total number of LGBTQ surveyed. Numerator group 2: number of young heterosexuals experiencing hate speech online. Denom group 2: total number of young heterosexuals surveyed. Relative risk > 2.0

3. Outcome: impact of internet use on young users (aged 8-25 years)

4. Observational cross-sectional study

5. Young internet users aged 8 - 25 years residing in the UK (not sure of time period and
coverage of survey)

6. Unethical to expose participants to potentially harmful internet content.

1. The figures are prevalence rates.
a. Numerator is those who said that their sleep had been negatively impacted from internet and digital devices

Denominator is the people between 8 and 25 years who use internet and digital devices under the domain .uk
b. Numerator is those who would like to spend less time on their devices

2. the numerator is : total no. of LGBTQ+ people who experienced hate speech / total no. of LGBTQ+ people
the denominator is: total no. of heterosexual people who experienced hate speech / total no. of heterosexual people.
The value can be odds ratio.

3. Outcome can be the negative impact of internet and digital devices... like experiencing hate speech, sleep.

4. Cross-sectional study design
5. The people between 8 and 25 years who use internet and digital devices under the domain .uk
6. There is no control group possible here.

Hi Sujit and everybody....
Another good read.. let me give this a try...

1) These are most likely prevalence figures- this is a cross sectional study and no distinction made if the outcomes looked at are new onset or preexisting.. so we would have to call it prevalence... 3 in 10 surveyed- which means the denominator will be all those who were surveyed, and numerator would be those with the outcomes (negatively affected sleep, desire to spend less time on devices)

2) "twice as likely"- which means we are looking at a RR of 2
The numerator would be risk of experiencing hate speech online in LGBTQ+ and denominator would be risk of experiencing hate speech online in those who identify as heterosexual

3) Outcome for the sentence given would be experiencing hate speech online- most likely self-reported by the survey participant (I am thinking it will be a yes/no question )- but they also looked at other outcomes like negative impact on sleep, and desire to reduce using their devices, and seeing distressing content online

4) Cross sectional - its a survey so cross sectional

5) so young individuals between ages 8 and 25 who use the internet in UK...

6) Well... if you think about it- you could do a RCT where one group gets a restricted supervised access to internet, and the other gets their usual access to internet (this does not mean we expose them to negative content on purpose- they will have their usual access)... and LGBTQ+ vs heterosexual would be subgroup analysis.... but however this RCT would aim to see how restriction of internet access helps improve the outcomes in this survey.... probably if designed appropriately, a RCT can be done... What do you guys think?

Fathima

Hello,

1. Are these incidence or prevalence figures? Who is in the numerator and denominator for the calculations?
-> Prevalence
-> Numerator: people who did a survey and negative impact on their sleep by surfing the internet and digital devices.
Denominator: People who did a survey

2. Explain who is in the numerator and denominator for the calculation referenced in the sentence above. What is the value of the RR figure?
-> Numerator: LGBTQ+ people who had experience hate speech online
Denominator: Heterosexual people who had experience hate speech online
-> >2

3. What is the outcome? How did you think this was measured?
-> People who had experience hate speech online
-> Prevalence

4. What is the study design?
-> Cross-sectional study

5. Who was included in this study?
-> People who aged 8-25 in different gender who had experience hate speech online

6. Why is it not possible to use a randomised control trial to do this study?
-> We cannot control intervention (exposure) which is experience hate speech online.

Thanks
Harisd

Hi,
1. Are these incidence or prevalence figures? Who is in the numerator and denominator for the calculations?
These are prevalence figures, numerator is participants who responded “yes” to positive impact on relationships with friends and denominator is total participants who responded to the survey or this specific question (there could be missing responses).

Young LGBTQ+ people are more than twice as likely to experience hate speech online compared with those who identify as heterosexual, according to a new report on how young people use the internet.

2. Explain who is in the numerator and denominator for the calculation referenced in the sentence above. What is the value of the RR figure?
Num: Risk of experiencing hate speech online among Young LGBTQ+ people
Denom: Risk of experiencing hate speech online among young heterosexuals
RR=>2

3. What is the outcome? How did you think this was measured?
Outcome: question on experiencing hate speech online (yes/no), self reported via an online survey??

4. What is the study design? Cross sectional design (although survey is done repeatedly but it is not the same participants that are followed)

5. Who was included in this study? Young people aged 8-25 years

6. Why is it not possible to use a randomised control trial to do this study? Ethical concerns of exposing them to harmful social media content, also there are minors or children in this group (<18 yrs) for whom parent consent and participant assent will be essential-just a word of caution, not that it will not allow possibility of an RCT.

Thank you.