share email twitter ⋅ join discord whatsapp(2ck)
Free 120  NBME 24  NBME 23  NBME 22  NBME 21  NBME 20  NBME 19  NBME 18  NBME 17  NBME 16  NBME 15  NBME 13 ⋅ Step 2 CK Free 120  Step 2 CK Form 6  Step 2 CK Form 7  Step 2 CK Form 8 
search for anything NEW!score predictor (“predict me!”) NEW!
NBME 21 Answers

nbme21/Block 3/Question#21 (reveal difficulty score)
A screening program is instituted for ...
10% 🔍 / 📺 / 🌳

Login to comment/vote.

Tutor box

Members from the Leaderboard offering 1-on-1 help: Want to be listed here? Email us!

submitted by haliburton(222),
unscramble the site ⋅ remove ads ⋅ become a member ($42/month)

AF 1270: hrdatrzCiacee yb ameviss pooaitnrelrfi of egsakyoremytac nda psallt.eet pomSmyst cdleiun geednbli dna dlooB mersa owhss daemyrkl dncereasi unembr fo tptslea,el ihwhc mya eb lrega or worisehet mlorlbaayn erf.odm iaEeaormlryhglt mya

submitted by drdoom(1045),
unscramble the site ⋅ remove ads ⋅ become a member ($42/month)

52,00 nesusttd ... utb oyu nfid uto ngurdi uryo inilita nrcese ahtt 050 ldaraey hvae eth aisd.see So, eorkusitt theos ep.pole htaT valsee 00,20 nsetsutd hwo o’dnt evha teh eise.asd

Oevr the escour fo 1 ,ayer uyo seidocvr 002 nttsesud lpeoevedd teh oicnnfiet. s:Thu

200 enw saces / ,2000 oeppel how t’dnid ehav teh seeadis nhwe yuo rsteatd oyru ysutd = 10 npetecr

,Tiyckr ktcyir NMEB ...

sympathetikey  Ah, I see. Thank you! +  
niboonsh  Im mad at how simple this question actually is +7  
sahusema  Incidence is measured from those AT RISK. People with the disease are not considered to be at risk. So 2500 - 500 = 2000 people at-risk. Of those 2000, within one year 200 develop the disease. So 200/2000 of the at-risk population develop the disease. 20/2000 = 10% = incidence +3  
daddyusmle  fuck im retarded +2  
skonys  Must be Florida State University.... +  

submitted by drdoom(1045),
unscramble the site ⋅ remove ads ⋅ become a member ($42/month)

oDnt’ reotgf ahtt ecciniden si hte nermub fo new sseca iwhhc ereegm in na audenfftce noiulpapto. dneneIcci si rgtniy to etg at het notsequi &g-;t n“I a nigve ,aeyr who ymna nwe eepolp pedvole sith id”?saees

In torhe ,wsrdo yuo nocatn uncto plepoe ohw yealrda vhea eht deasies. ouY veha ot cudelxe theos oleepp rofm ouyr cicalntao.ul uoY twna to ,wkno omang all eht ppeoel uto there who OD TNO aevh the asd,eise hwo anmy sietm iths eayr swa enoemso le)yw(n s?idonaegd

Sadi dyeirftefln i,llst you do’nt ntaw ot ulnob“dct-”oue eolepp ohw levodeepd teh iasdsee roeefb uroy tdus.y As na etigoisd,ipemlo ahtt wuodl wresc pu your ensse of owh evencfiit or imatnseriblss a dseaies is. oYu natw to on,kw fr“mo tiem1 ot teim2 woh anmy wne sasec erm”geed?

questioneverything  You would count the total risk pool. Chlamydia is not a chronic disease so you would treat those 500 people and they would return to the risk pool. +1  
drdoom  But you would first have to determine that they CLEARED the infection. What if you gave them tx and then they come back and say, "doc i got the chlamydia" -- is this a new case or did the tx fail? You're assuming it cleared but maybe it didn't. That's why you want to EXCLUDE from the start anyone who might already have disease of interest. +7  

submitted by questioneverything(4),
unscramble the site ⋅ remove ads ⋅ become a member ($42/month)

kO I get hatt if 005 adarlye heav eth ieadess then teh isrk olpo is pdeodpr to 2000 tetdussn ubt het tueisoqn alilyficpesc ayss atth eth sett is deon a yaer rit...flae 005 oppeel hda dyhamac,il oyu odlwu taret .emht uYo dtno' beemoc numemi ot calmdayih tfaer nencoifit os ehty ldouw go bcak niot teh sirk oo,pl iegmnna the olop lwodu trenru ot .2500 hTe wnersa dlshuo be 8,% this wsa a bad usoetiqn.

thepacksurvives  Yeah, this was my issue. I got it wrong because of this-- still don't understand the logic bc you can get chlamydia multiple times +8  
hungrybox  FUCK you're right. Damn I didn't even think about that. That's fucking dumb. I guess this is why nobody gets perfect scores on this exam lol. Once you get smart enough, the errors in the questions start tripping you up. Lucky for me I'm lightyears behind that stage lmao +10  
usmile1  to make it even more poorly written, it says they are doing a screening program for FIRST YEAR women college students. So one year later, are they following this same group of students, or would they be screening the incoming first years? +6  
dashou19  I think the same at first, but after a second read, the question stem said "additional" 200 students, which means the first 500 students don't count. +  
santal  @hungrybox You are me. +2  
neovanilla  @usmile1 I was thinking the exact same thing... +1  
happyhib_  I agree this is a trash question; I was like well if this is done yearly for new freshman the following year would be of the new class (but the word additional made me go against this). Also you could assume that they were treated and no longer have the disease... I dont like it honestly but know for incidence they want you to not include those with disease so i just went with dogma questions on incidence to get to 10% +  

submitted by drdoom(1045),
unscramble the site ⋅ remove ads ⋅ become a member ($42/month)

lsoA cndroise iths trgae oensditpcir romf eth ’HIsN eSMH daabsta:e

NDNCIEECI: eTh ubmenr of wen sscae fo a nevig ieedass dnirug a eving rpiedo ni a csdiefpei ntaol.upipo It asol si sdeu fro eht aert ta whhci new eenstv ccuor in a edefind lpuipnoota. It si nfritdfetiadee rmfo EENCLPRAEV, which rrseef ot all sces,a nwe or lod, ni eth ppnoiauotl ta a nigev te.mi


questioneverything  The prevalence of chlamydia in this group would be 0. It is not a chronic disease. +  

submitted by usmle11a(90),
unscramble the site ⋅ remove ads ⋅ become a member ($42/month)


the nqoiuset ensotd ays tath eth 500 got edruc, os it wlli eb 0020 how era at rkis.

search for anything NEW!