indeed, ecological study is part of epidemiological studies

Hi Sai,

Ecological studies would be considered as observational epidemiological studies. However, what makes this study type distinct from other designs is the focus on populations rather than individuals in making comparisons.

A major weakness to this approach of comparison is the ecological fallacy and a resultant inability to infer any causality.

Regards,

There is a new version. I mean infectious ecology. On it quite a lot is being done.

Dmitry Nikolaenko

This is an example of what is being done now in a particular case of Kauri disease.

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Kauri_dieback_disease_KDD_and_infectious_ecology_What_can_be_done_to_provide_a_scientific_explanation_for_the_infectious_changes_in_New_Zealand

The topic is interesting from a theoretical and methodological point of view. It is clear that it is worth saving this unique kind of trees.

Hi Dmitry,

From my understanding, your write up on 'infectious ecology' is not really related to a study design but more of a conceptual framework / model ?

Regards,

Yes, ecological study is a type of epidemiological study design where the study unit is at community level. Most of the time we use secondary data to compare countries and the like.

Yes ecological designs are used in epidemiology. The key is to remember that findings and conclusions should only be applied to the population group used in the study and not to individuals.

I agree all comments above about ecological studies, it would be considered as observational epidemiological studies, and conclusion is based on population or community in the study rather than individuals.

Infectious ecology is moving away from anthropocentrism epidemiology. It allows you to register a lot more information on the phenomenon of infection. Gives a completely new vision of what is ecology. Ecology - the science of relationships in nature. Infectious ecology - the science of relationships arising in the process of the emergence and spread of infections. Not necessarily human. Infections are a part of nature.

I meant it. Sorry if I did not understand something in the essence of this discussion.

Yes, but it is of great importance to be clear that there are no individuals data, as the risk of chance findings are much greater in ecological studies than in proper epidemiological studies with individual data. It not uncommon to hear about correlations that are striking but truly questionable.

Thanks for the remark.

The question of correlations. Much depends on the expert paradigm. In ecology, the mass of individual cases. With the right approach, we can find a common manifestation of various phenomena. In the study of the manifestations of infectious reality, there is also a mass of individual cases. The novelty of the infectious ecology approach is that we are moving away from a) an emphasis on man only and b) domestic animals. We can identify and take in account a much larger array of information. We start looking for correlations in the new area. Example: disease of the root system of plants and the manifestation of the infectious reality of plants.

Two specific cases. Kauri disease and diseases of the roots of black alder. There is an unexpected connection. The fact is that a general mechanism of geochemical changes in the root system appears. This is followed by changes in the manifestation of the pathogenic properties of microorganisms. Probably, there is a common reaction mechanism for microorganisms that live in similar ecological niches.

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Kauri_dieback_disease_KDD_and_infectious_ecology_What_can_be_done_to_provide_a_scientific_explanation_for_the_infectious_changes_in_New_Zealand

Unfortunately, there is a lack of scientific direction in the study of soil associated with infectious diseases. This is anthrax and plant diseases and a lot of other.

And so on. And so on for 50 pages.

As an example, a well-known disease can be interpreted in a significantly different way. It is related to kauri. Unfortunately, it is difficult to stude this topic because of the geographical specificity of the region. Getting to New Zealand is not easy. Lots of information in the roots of Kauri.

Ecological studies are part of epidemiological and medical geograpgy studies. To make sound conclusions out of them we need additional designs like a case-control design. Such combination provides evidence on population exposure and individual exposure and related outcome(s).

An ecological (or correlational) study uses whole population data to compare the frequency of disease in different groups over the same period. It can also compare the frequency of the disease in the same population but at different times.The ecological study is characterized by a lack of information on the cross-distribution between the factor and the disease.

Yes but need to understand about the limitation of ecologic study. The association observed between variables on aggregated level vs individual level data can be unfair.

Yes, ecology should be considered a division of study. The relationship should be explained in terms of transmission - virus/bacteria/plant/animal to human. The passage mechanism is often un-explored and, other than saying that transmission occurred, valuable information is lost that could be used to nix future transmissions and for cures. This cross-boundary study could open up a whole new realm of novel informational studies.