Epidemiologists are concerned with population growth as it relates to potential healthcare issues. Why do rates and measures of population change use the “total mid-year population” instead of the “end-of-year population?” What makes one measurement more effective than the other? Choose a real or a hypothetical example to explain how using the “end-of-year population” affects data collection and outcomes.
Compose an essay addressing the topics above. You must format your paper in accordance with APA guidelines. It should be 3–4 pages in length and include support from the required readings, and at least one outside source. Use the WCU Library to find scholarly sources that support your paper.
Due: Sunday, 11:59 p.m. (Pacific time)
Points Possible: 100
Expert Solution Preview
Introduction:
The use of population measures and rates is crucial in the field of epidemiology. Understanding the changes in population size and structure provides valuable insights into public health issues and can assist policymakers in making informed decisions. One important factor in population measurements is the use of the total mid-year population as opposed to the end-of-year population. This essay will discuss why epidemiologists use the “total mid-year population” and explain why it is more effective than the “end-of-year population.” Additionally, a real or hypothetical example will be provided to demonstrate the impact on data collection and outcomes when using the “end-of-year population.”
Answer:
Epidemiologists use the total mid-year population because it provides a more accurate estimation of population size and changes over time. The end-of-year population is only a snapshot of the population at a single point in time. It does not account for the fluctuation of population size throughout the year, which can significantly impact health outcomes. For example, if a population experienced a significant increase in the number of births or immigration in the last quarter of the year, the end-of-year population measure would not accurately reflect the true population size and composition.
In contrast, the mid-year population estimate considers the changes in the population throughout the year. It accounts for seasonal variations, such as increased mortality rates during winter, and population movements, such as migration. The mid-year population also provides a better estimate of the number of individuals exposed to health risks and the overall disease burden, which is important in developing public health interventions.
To illustrate the difference between using mid-year population estimates and end-of-year measures, let us consider a hypothetical example. Suppose that the end-of-year population of a city is 1 million residents. However, during the year, the city experienced significant population movements due to a natural disaster, resulting in an additional 50,000 residents for six months. If we use the end-of-year population measure, we would underestimate the true population size, which could impact health interventions such as vaccination programs or hospital capacity planning. However, if we use the mid-year population estimate, we would have a more accurate reflection of the population size and composition and can make better-informed decisions about healthcare.
In conclusion, epidemiologists use the total mid-year population measure because it provides a more accurate reflection of population size and changes over time. The use of the end-of-year population measure can result in an inaccurate estimation of the population, which can impact health outcomes and public health interventions. Understanding the importance of population measurement in epidemiology is critical to improving public health outcomes.
