RESEARCH TITLE: The Correlation between the Academic Performance and Stress Level of 1st year SBA students in the midst of the Covid-19 Pandemic. 
 

1.SAMPLING DESIGN (random sampling)

2.ETHICAL CONSIDERATION

 

pls make the 2 parts of this research.

The number of confirmed COVID-19 cases divided by population size is used as a coarse measurement for the burden of disease in a population. However, this fraction depends heavily on the sampling intensity and the various test criteria used in different jurisdictions, and many sources indicate that a large fraction of cases tend to go undetected.

Methods
Estimates of the true prevalence of COVID-19 in a population can be made by random sampling and pooling of RT-PCR tests. Here I use simulations to explore how experiment sample size and degrees of sample pooling impact precision of prevalence estimates and potential for minimizing the total number of tests required to get individual-level diagnostic results.

Results
Sample pooling can greatly reduce the total number of tests required for prevalence estimation. In low-prevalence populations, it is theoretically possible to pool hundreds of samples with only marginal loss of precision. Even when the true prevalence is as high as 10% it can be appropriate to pool up to 15 samples. Sample pooling can be particularly beneficial when the test has imperfect specificity by providing more accurate estimates of the prevalence than an equal number of individual-level tests.

Conclusion
Sample pooling should be considered in COVID-19 prevalence estimation efforts.

The care of patients during the COVID-19 pandemic has added many layers of complexity to ethical issues. Our response emphasizes the importance of having an ethically sound framework to inform our decisions, requiring caregivers to consider what is ethically optimal and feasible for the patient. It is increasingly important to understand the ethical principles and to appropriately apply them to both patient management decisions and guide scarce resource allocation. If we are to be prepared to face the many challenges of this pandemic, we must prioritize the ethical demands to our treatment and management concerns.

CLINICAL ETHICS DURING A PANDEMIC
Challenging ethical issues in healthcare are common because central to our role as caregivers is the relief of human suffering. Reviewed on a global scale, ethical issues surrounding pandemics are not unique to our healthcare systems, neither are the ethical issues surrounding scarce resource allocation. The concept of scarce resource allocation has value-incorporation, as shown during World War II when the US production of penicillin was not enough to meet all the need, with 90% being used for soldiers. This demonstrates the promotion of instrumental value (saves the most lives because soldiers were most valuable at that time) in allocation.1

As part of an anticipated response to the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, the importance of having an ethically sound framework to inform our clinical decisions cannot be emphasized enough. During this time, healthcare leaders are asked to engage in proac tive planning where addressing worst-case scenarios is the first step to reducing morbidity, mortality, and other undesirable effects of an emerging public health emergency.2

POPULATION HEALTH VS INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS
A public health emergency, such as a surplus of people seeking healthcare as well as critically ill patients with COVID-19 or another severe respiratory illness requiring admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), disrupts normal processes for supporting ethically sound patient care due to the steeply rising supply demand gap for treatment or supportive measures. 

The ethical framework in a public health crisis shifts to promoting the health of the population by using resources responsibly to maximize the total number of lives saved. Understanding the guiding principles surrounding public health ethics may help promote trust and alleviate moral distress and burn-out in bedside providers under austere circumstances. 

The focus of public health ethics, can require limitations on individual rights and preferences due to need for prudent use of resources and strategies.3 These limitations must be consistently and equitably applied, be proportional, necessary, and relevant.5

PRIORITIES OF HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS
During pandemics, the priorities of healthcare providers change. Shifts in these priorities create competing obligations for providers who are naturally geared towards focusing on their individual patients. Policy planners are asked to consider the two competing ethical obligations that must be held in balance (for the sake of brevity we only consider the two primary obligations listed here but concede that other ethical obligations exist):

Duty to care—relief of suffering and respect for the rights and preferences of patients, which is a focus of ethics consultation services.

Duty to promote equity and moral equality— fairness relative to need in the distribution of risks and benefits of care provision in society, which is the focus of public health ethics.

Ethical reasoning thus requires caregivers to consider what should be ethically optimal and feasible for the patient. This is known as the crisis standard of care—a recognition of limitations during times of scarcity. In addition to duty to care and fairness, this ethical guidance is also based on duty to steward resources, transparency, consistency, proportionality, and accountability.  As an ethical concept, it offers concrete guidance for a system-wide response to a disaster, addressing allocation.
RESPONSIBILITY TO FAMILIES
Communicating the definition of crisis standards of care to patients and families at admission is crucial to fulfil our commitment to transparency. Complimentary services (eg, ethics service, palliative care teams) should be involved early to potentially decrease distress for the patient and family. This applies to all patients being cared for during the COVID-19 pandemic, regardless of COVID-19 status.
RESPONSIBILITIES TO HEALTHCARE WORKERS: PPE, EXPOSURE RISK, PSYCHOLOGICAL AND MENTAL BURDEN
Pandemics challenge our duty to provide care to patients versus the moral obligation to ourselves and our families, among other tensions. The risk of occupation-related infectious exposures reveal vulnerabilities for both patient and caregiver populations during a public health emergency. Such populations include older individuals, those with underlying health conditions, and existence of pre-existing barriers to health care owing to insurance or immigration status. Thus, healthcare workers are prioritized when distributing PPE because their specialized training lends instrumental valve in pandemic response, which in turn increases their perceived duty to provide care. If providers are sick, their smaller numbers will impair the crisis response, further diminishing our ability to maximize benefits for patients. Furthermore, the risk of quarantine and loss of income, transmission of the disease, and, possibly, death prove that the risk to front-line medical providers is both physical and psychological—both aspects of which should be considered.