pharmacoepidemiologyical study

All the details in the attachment
its same here
I just copy paste.

Choose a pharmacoepidemiologyical study in a topic of your interest and critically appraise all article sections in your own words.

Please use the checklist next page to complete this assignment.

A checklist for evaluating pharmacoepidemiology studies:

A. The research questions, study design, and population:
1. Why was this study done and why is it important? Does the introduction section present any gaps in knowledge that the study address?

2. What were the objectives?

3. What was the hypothesis of the study?
4. What was the primary medication exposure of interest? Was this accurately measured? Was dose of the exposure medication accurately measured so that the dose-response characteristic can be evaluated?

5. What was the primary outcomes of interest? Was this accurately measured? Was it a surrogate measure and was it appropriate?

6. What study design was used?

7. Was the source of study population, process of participant selection, sample size, and ratio of cases to comparison participant presented clearly?

8. Could there have been bias in the selection of study participant? How likely was the bias?

9. Could there have been bias in the collection of information? How likely was the bias?

10. What provisions were made to minimize the influence of confounding factors prior to the analysis of data?
Were these provisions sufficient?

B. Data analysis:
1. What methods were used to control confounding bias during data analysis? Were these methods appropriate and sufficient?
2. What measures of association were reported in the study? What measures of statistical stability were reported in this study?

C. Results and interpretation of study findings:
1. What were the main results of this study?

2. How was the interpretation of the results affected by information bias, selection bias, and confounding? Consider both the direction and magnitude of any bias.

3. How was the interpretation of the results affected by nondifferential misclassification? Consider both the direction and magnitude of this misclassification.

4. Did the discussion section adequately address the limitations of the study?

5. What were the authors’ main conclusion? Were they justified by the findings?

6. To what population can the results of this study be generalized?