Outbreak investigation, prevention levels, screening
The third question is the technical one: the criteria to be met before screening for a disease are a published set, not a matter of judgement, and answering it from first principles rather than from Wilson and Jungner is the commonest way to lose marks here.
Editorial process
Last reviewed · August 15, 2026
Four numbered questions, and the last two are technical
Choose the outbreak for what it lets you answer rather than for interest, since three of the four questions depend on the disease having a screening test and defined prevention levels. A vaccine-preventable disease or one with an established screening pathway works far better than a novel pathogen with neither. Then take the investigation steps in the standard sequence and name it as such: confirm the diagnosis and verify that an outbreak exists against the expected baseline, establish a case definition, find and count cases, describe them by person, place and time, generate a hypothesis, test it with an analytic study, implement control measures — which in practice begin long before the analysis finishes — and communicate the findings. The ordering matters and the point worth making is that control does not wait for certainty. Say so explicitly, because a report that describes the steps as strictly sequential has misdescribed how outbreaks are actually handled.
The prevention levels need two examples each and must be genuinely at their level rather than three descriptions of treatment. Primary prevents the disease occurring — vaccination, vector control, sanitation, health education before exposure. Secondary detects it early while intervention still changes the outcome — screening, contact tracing, case finding. Tertiary limits the damage in people who already have it — treatment to prevent complications, rehabilitation, and preventing onward transmission from known cases. Then the screening question, which is technical: the criteria are Wilson and Jungner's. The condition must be an important health problem with a recognisable latent stage, there must be an accepted treatment and facilities to deliver it, the test must be suitable and acceptable, the natural history must be understood, and cost must be balanced against medical care as a whole. Evaluation follows directly: sensitivity, specificity, predictive value at the actual prevalence, uptake, and whether outcomes change.
Likely learning objectives
Inferred from the brief — check these against your own rubric.
- 01Set out the standard sequence of an outbreak investigation and why control precedes certainty.
- 02Distinguish primary, secondary and tertiary prevention by when they act.
- 03Apply the established criteria for whether a disease should be screened for.
- 04Evaluate a screening programme by test performance and by outcome change.
Read the full question
Review every instruction before using the planning guidance that follows.
Course-wide instructions that accompany this question
Important information for writing discussion questions and participation Hi Class, Please read through the following information on writing a Discussion question response and participation posts. Contact me if you have any questions. Important information on Writing a Discussion Question Your response needs to be a minimum of 150 words (not including your list of references) There needs to be at least TWO references with ONE being a peer reviewed professional journal article. Include in-text citations in your response Do not include quotes—instead summarize and paraphrase the information Follow APA-7th edition Points will be deducted if the above is not followed Participation –replies to your classmates or instructor A minimum of 6 responses per week, on at least 3 days of the week. Each response needs at least ONE reference with citations—best if it is a peer reviewed journal article Each response needs to be at least 75 words in length (does not include your list of references) Responses need to be substantive by bringing information to the discussion or further enhance the discussion. Responses of “I agree” or “great post” does not count for the word count. Follow APA 7th edition Points will be deducted if the above is not followed Remember to use and follow APA-7th edition for all weekly assignments, discussion questions, and participation points. Here are some helpful links Student paper example Citing Sources The Writing Center is a great resource Welcome to class Hello class and welcome to the class and I will be your instructor for this course. This is a -week course and requires a lot of time commitment, organization, and a high level of dedication. Please use the class syllabus to guide you through all the assignments required for the course. I have also attached the classroom policies to this announcement to know your expectations for this course. Please review this document carefully and ask me any questions if you do. You could email me at any time or send me a message via the “message” icon in halo if you need to contact me. I check my email regularly, so you should get a response within 24 hours. If you have not heard from me within 24 hours and need to contact me urgently, please send a follow up text to. I strongly encourage that you do not wait until the very last minute to complete your assignments. Your assignments in weeks 4 and 5 require early planning as you would need to present a teaching plan and interview a community health provider. I advise you look at the requirements for these assignments at the beginning of the course and plan accordingly. I have posted the YouTube link that explains all the class assignments in detail. It is required that you watch this 32-minute video as the assignments from week 3 through 5 require that you follow the instructions to the letter to succeed. Failure to complete these assignments according to instructions might lead to a zero. After watching the video, please schedule a one-on-one with me to discuss your topic for your project by the second week of class. Use this link to schedule a 15-minute session. Please, call me at the time of your appointment on my number. Please note that I will NOT call you. Please, be advised I do NOT accept any assignments by email. If you are having technical issues with uploading an assignment, contact the technical department and inform me of the issue. If you have any issues that would prevent you from getting your assignments to me by the deadline, please inform me to request a possible extension. Note that working fulltime or overtime is no excuse for late assignments. There is a 5%-point deduction for every day your assignment is late. This only applies to approved extensions. Late assignments will not be accepted. If you think you would be needing accommodations due to any reasons, please contact the appropriate department to request accommodations. Plagiarism is highly prohibited. Please ensure you are citing your sources correctly using APA 7th edition. All assignments including discussion posts should be formatted in APA with the appropriate spacing, font, margin, and indents. Any papers not well formatted would be returned back to you, hence, I advise you review APA formatting style. I have attached a sample paper in APA format and will also post sample discussion responses in subsequent announcements. Your initial discussion post should be a minimum of 200 words and response posts should be a minimum of 150 words. Be advised that I grade based on quality and not necessarily the number of words you post. A minimum of TWO references should be used for your initial post. For your response post, you do not need references as personal experiences would count as response posts. If you however cite anything from the literature for your response post, it is required that you cite your reference. You should include a minimum of THREE references for papers in this course. Please note that references should be no more than 5 years old except recommended as a resource for the class. Furthermore, for each discussion board question, you need ONE initial substantive response and TWO substantive responses to either your classmates or your instructor for a total of THREE responses. There are TWO discussion questions each week, hence, you need a total minimum of SIX discussion posts for each week. I usually post a discussion question each week. You could also respond to these as it would count towards your required SIX discussion posts for the week. I understand this is a lot of information to cover in 5 weeks, however, the Bible says in Philippians 4:13 that we can do all things through Christ that strengthens us. Even in times like this, we are encouraged by God’s word that we have that ability in us to succeed with His strength. I pray that each and every one of you receives strength for this course and life generally as we navigate through this pandemic that is shaking our world today. Relax and enjoy the course!
Turn the brief into deliverables
- 01A 750-1,000 word report on a selected outbreak.
- 02The investigation steps in sequence.
- 03Two examples at each of the three prevention levels.
- 04The screening criteria applied to this disease.
- 05An evaluation plan, with three scholarly sources under five years old.
Investigation steps, prevention levels, then screening
Select the outbreak
Choose a disease with a screening pathway and defined prevention options.
Investigation steps
Give the sequence from confirming the outbreak to communicating findings.
Three levels, two examples each
Provide primary, secondary and tertiary examples at their proper level.
Screening criteria
Apply the established criteria to the chosen disease.
Evaluating the programme
Cover sensitivity, specificity, predictive value at prevalence, uptake and outcomes.
Sources on outbreak method and screening criteria
Recommended databases
- World Health Organization outbreak resources
- PubMed Central
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
- Peer-reviewed epidemiology journals
Search sequence
- 1.Choose the disease first, then confirm a screening test and programme exist for it.
- 2.Read a published outbreak investigation for your disease, which supplies the steps in real form.
- 3.Look up the established screening criteria and apply them one by one.
- 4.Filter every search to the last five years, since the brief excludes older sources.
Reference shortlist
These are authoritative starting points, not a ready-made bibliography. A qualified reviewer must confirm that each source fits the assignment and supports the claim beside which it is cited.
Nothing here is cleared for citation until you have read it.
- 01
Outbreak toolkit
World Health Organization · 2024
The investigation methodology in its operational form, which is what the first question asks for.
- 02
Influenza (seasonal)
World Health Organization · 2023
Burden and programme data for a disease with all three prevention levels available.
- 03
Infection prevention and control
World Health Organization · 2024
Control measures across the prevention levels, particularly the primary and tertiary examples.
- 04
Evidence-Based Medicine
StatPearls, NCBI Bookshelf · 2024
Frames how screening programme effectiveness is evidenced, which the fourth question requires.
Review before submission
Common mistakes
- Choosing a disease with no screening test, which makes two questions unanswerable.
- Giving three levels of prevention that are all really treatment.
- Answering the screening-criteria question from intuition rather than from the established criteria.
- Evaluating a screening programme by how many cases it finds rather than by outcomes.
- Using sources older than five years, which the brief excludes.
Submission checklist
- Does your chosen disease support all four questions?
- Are the investigation steps in the standard order?
- Are there exactly two examples per prevention level, at the right level?
- Have you used the established screening criteria?
- Are all three sources scholarly and under five years old?
Use this guide to plan and review your own work. Follow your institution's rules and read our academic-integrity policy.
Written by
Aaron Bishop
MA, Education
assignment interpretation and research-methods coaching across disciplines
Aaron leads the EssayCrackers editorial desk. He works on how assignment briefs are read — what a rubric is actually asking for, and where students most often answer a different question than the one set.
Reviewed by
Dr. Nathan Cole
PhD, Rhetoric & Composition
Argumentation and thesis development
Nathan teaches first-year composition and directs a university writing center. He reviews EssayCrackers guides for argumentative soundness and citation accuracy.