By: Winning Team 12

UTS CRP-5 2014

1. Pernyataan yang benar mengenai median
survival adalah :
A. Hasil studi yang dinyatakan dengan 5 years
survival rate.
B. Hasilnya merupakan ratio yang menyatakan
jumlah subjek ang mengalami outcome per
subjek yang tinggal.
C. Waktu yang menyatakan dimana 50% subjek
penelitian masih dapat diamati,.
D. Rasio perbandingan antara jumlah subjek
yang tinggal per seluruh subjek diawal
penelitian
E. Kemungkinan subjek bertahan sampai
pengamatan selesai.
2. Nilai yang paling representative untuk menilai
kemampuan bertahan hidup pasien yang
mengalami suatu penyakit dengan survival rate
yang sama adalah
A. 5 years survival rate
B. Case fatality rate
C. Median survival
D. Cause spesific death rate
E. Prevalence
3. Nilai presentase yang menyatakan kemampuan
(peluang) hidup pasien untuk waktu lima tahun
adalah
A. 5 years survival
B. Median survival
C. Median survival rate
D. 5 years survival rate
E. Cause spesific death rate
4. Tujuan dilakukan blind fashion untuk menilai
outcome pada studi prognostik bertujuan untuk
menghindari :
A. Selection bias
B. Recall bias
C. Measurement bias
D. Migration bias
E. Detection bias
5. Pernyataan yang benar mengenai sensitivity
analysis adalah :
A. Pasien yang mengalami drop out atau loss to
folllow-up
tidak
diikutkan
dalam
perhitungan.

B. Pasien yang berpindah tempat tinggal harus

di follow-up sampai terjadi outcome.
C. Pasien yang masih bisa diamati saja yang
dihitung dalam analisis akhir.
D. Dilakukannya perhitungan best case dan
worse case scenario
E. Jila loss to follow-up lebih dari 20% penelitian
dikatakan tidak valid.
Keluarga seorang pasien yang menderita
rhabdomyosarcoma (kanker otot lurik) datang ke
praktek dokter B dan bertanya tentang bagaimana
kelanjutan dari penyakit kerabatnya agar dapat
menentukan langkah selanjutnya, apakah dengan
tindakan operatif atau palliatif. Dokter B
menemukan jurnal dengan judul Presentation,
prognostic factors and patterns of failure in adult
rhabdomyosarcoma. Penelitian tersebut dilakukan
pada periode tahun 1961 1999 dengan jumlah
pasien 39 orang, 5 years survival rate pada
keseluruhan subjek adalah 35%. Kurva survival
(Kaplan-Meler) tertera.
6. Median survival pada penelitian tersebut
A. <3
B. >5
C. <10
D. <7
E. <30.
7. Besarnya estimasi 5 years survival pada
penelitian tersebut:
A. 27% - 43%
B. 19.3% - 50.7%
C. 24.3% - 45.7%
D. 20.5% - 49.5%
E. 19.3% - 51.7%
Soal no. 8 10
Hasil penelitian Migowski dan Azevedo e Silva
tentang kanker prostate (Survival of patients with
clinically localized prostate cancer) menunjukkan
hasil sebagai berikut :

UTS CRP-5 2014

By: Winning Team 12

8. Hal yang dapat memperberat keadaan prognosis

penderita kanker prostat dari hasil penelitian
diatas adalah
A. Kadar Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA)
<40ng/mL
B. Well-differentiated menurut skala Gleason
C. Stadium B1 menurut Jewett-Whitmore
D. Penderita kulit putih
E. Penderita kulit berwarna
9. Hal yang dapat memperingan keadaan prognosis
penderita kanker prostat dari hasil penelitian di
atas adalah :
A. Kadar Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) <
40ng/mL
B. Penderita kulit putih
C. Stadium A2 menurut Jewett Whitmore
D. Penderita kulit putih
E. Poorly differentiated menurut skala Gleason
10. Interpretasi yang benar dari hasil tersebut
tentang warna kulit adalah :
A. Orang berkulit putih memiliki prognosis lebih
jelek 0,44 kali dibanding orang kulit
berwarna
B. Orang berkulit putih memiliki prognosis lebih
jelek 2,27 kali dibanding orang kulit
berwarna
C. Orang berkulit berwarna memiliki prognosis
lebih jelek 2,27 kali dibanding orang kulit
putih
D. Orang berkulit putih memiliki prognosis lebih
baik 2,27 kali dibanding orang kulit berwarna

E. Orang berkulit putih memiliki prognosis lebih

baik 0,44 kali dibanding orang kulit berwarna
11. Elemen kunci dalam penelitiam RCT adalah :
A. Validitas, Importan dan Applicable
B. Result, clinis dan therapy
C. Randomisasi, clinis, dan blinding
D. Randomisasi, control, dan blinding
E. Sistematis,
sampel
besar,
ada
pembanding
12. Fungsi randomisasi dalam penelitian
eksperimental adalah:
A. Supaya hasil penelitian valid
B. Keseimbangan peluang
C. Supaya hasil penelitian dapat diterapkan
D. Pengamatan cukup dan lengkap
E. Adanya ketersamaran antara kelompok
control dan trial
13. Berikut ini adalah worksheet therapy untuk
menentukan validitas
A. Were patients analyzed in the group to
which they were randomized
B. What is magnitude of the treatment
effect
C. Was our patients potential benefit and
harms from the therapy
D. Was a defined, representative sample of
patients assembled at a common point
(usually early) point in the course of their
disease?
E. Were objective outcome criteria applied
in a blind fashion?
14. Berikut ini adalah worksheet therapy untuk
menentukan applicability
A. If subgroups prognostic factor and
validation in an independent test set
patients?
B. Will this evidence make a clinically
important impact on our conclusions
about what to offer or tell our patients?
C. What are our patients values and
expectations for both outcome we are
trying to prevent and the treatment we
are offering?
D. Were patients analyzed in the groups to
which they were randomized?
E. How likely are the outcome over time?
15. NNT adalah :

UTS CRP-5 2014

By: Winning Team 12

A. Jumlah pasien yang harus diterapi untuk
mendapatkan
tambahan
hasil
pengobatan yang baik
B. Jumlah pasien yang harus diterapi untuk
mendapatkan
tambahan
hasil
pengobatan yang kurang baik
C. Jumlah pasien yang dibutuhkan untuk
mendapatkan satu keluhan dari terapi
D. Perbedaan resiko antara control group
dan treatment group
E. Presentase penurunan resiko antara
kelompok treatment dengan kelompok
control
16. NNT dapat dihitung dengan formula :
A. (CER-EER)/CER
B. 1/ARR
C. CER-ARR/CER
D. CER-EER
E. ARR-CER
Objectives : to evaluate whether five days treatment
with injectable ampicilin plus gentamicin compared
with chloramphenicol reduces treatment failure in
children age 2-59 months with community acquired
very severe pneumonia in low resource settings.
Design :Open label randomised controlled trial.
Setting :inpatient wards within tertiary care
hospitals in Bangladesh, Ecuador, India, Mexico,
Pakistan, Yemen and Zambia. Participants : Children
aged 2-59 months with WHO defined very severe
pneumonia. Intervention : chloramphenicol versus a
combination of ampicilin plus gentamicin. Primary
outcome measure was treatment failure at five
days. Secondary outcomes were treatment failure
defined among all participants evaluated at 48 hours
and at 10 and 21 days. Results : more children failed
treatment with chloramphenicol at day 5 ( 16% v
11%; relative risk : 1,43, 95% confidence interval
1,03 to 1,97) and also by day 10 and 21. Overall, 112
bacterial isolates were obtained from blood ang lung
aspirates in 110 children (11.5%), with the most
common organism being Staphylococcus aureus
(n=47) and Staphylococcus pneumonia (n=22). In
subgroups analysis, bacteraemia with any organism
increases the risk of treatment failure at 21 days in
the chloramphenicol group (2.09, 1.41 to 3.10) but
not in the ampicilin plus gentamicin group (1.12,
0.59 to 2.13). similarly, isolation of S. Pneumonia
incresed the risk of treatment failure at day 21 (4.06,

2.73 to 6.03) and death (5.80, 2.62 to 12.85) in the

chloramphenicol group but not in the ampicilin plus
gentamicin group. No difference was found in
treatment failure for children with S.aureus
bacteraemis in the two groups, but the power to
detect a difference in this subgroup analysis was
low. Independent predictions of treatment failure by
multivariate anylysis were hypoxaemia (oxygen
saturation <90%), receiving chloramphenicol, being
female, and poor immunisation status. Conclusion :
injectable ampicilin plus gentamicin is superior to
injectable chloramphenicol for the treatment of
community acquired very severe pneumonia in
children aged 2-59 months in low resource settings.
17. Was the assignment of patients to
treatments randomized?
A. Yes, randomized controlled trial
B. Yes, intention to treat
C. No, open label
D. Yes, double blind
E. Can not tell
18. Were all patients analyzed in the groups to
which they were randomized?
A. Yes, randomized controlled trial
B. Yes, intention to treat
C. No, open label
D. Yes, double blind
E. Can not tell
19. Were patients, clinicians, and study personal
kept blind to treatment?
A. Yes, randomized controlled trial
B. Yes, intention to treat
C. No, open label
D. Yes, double blind
E. Can not tell
20. Nilai CER pada jurnal di atas adalah :
A. 0,16
B. 0,312
C. 0,11
D. 0,005
E. 20
21. Nilai EER pada jurnal di atas adalah
A. 0,16
B. 0,312
C. 0,11
D. 0,005
E. 20
22. Nilai ARR pada jurnal di atas adalah
UTS CRP-5 2014

By: Winning Team 12

A. 0,16
B. 0,312
C. 0,11
D. 0,005
E. 20
23. NIlai RRR pada jurnal di atas adalah
A. 0,16
B. 0,312
C. 0,11
D. 0,05
E. 20
24. Nilai NNT pada jurnal di atas adalah :
A. 0,16
B. 0,312
C. 0,11
D. 0,05
E. 20

Results: The proportion of patients with bacterial

eradication at 2 days after treatment was 98%
(91/93) in the 3-day group and 93% (83/89) in the
7-day group (p=0.16). The frequency of adverse
event, including drowsiness, headache, nausea or
vomiting, and loss of appetite, was significantly
lower in the 3-day group. Interpretation: a 3-day
course of antibiotic therapy is not inferior to a 7day course of treatment of uncomplicated
sumptomatic UTI in older women, and that the
shorter course is better tolerated.

Untuk soal No. 25-30 berdasarkan abstak artikel

jurnal diawah ini
Background : The optimal duration of antibiotic
therapy in older patients with uncomplicated
urinary tract infection (UTI) is still a matter of
debate. The aim of this randomized controlled
double-blind noninferiority trial was to compare
the efficacy and safety of 3-day and 7-day courses
of oral ciprofloxacin for uncomplicated
symptomatic UTI in older women. Methods: A total
of 183 women at least 65 years of age with acute
uncomplicated UTI were recruited from ambulatory
clinics and hospital acute care units. Patients with
pyelonephritis, contraindications to
fluoroquinolones, recent use of antibiotics, urinary
tract abnormalities and diabetes mellitus were
excluded. Women were randomly assigned to
receive either ciprofloxacin 250 mg twice daily
orally for 3 days followed by placebo for 4 days (the
3-day group, 93 patients) or ciprofloxacin 250 mg
twice daily orally for 7 days ( the 7-day group, 90
patients). Bacterial eradication, clinical
improvement and occurrence of adverse events
were determined 2 days after completion of
treatment, and occurrence of reinfection or relapse
were determined 6 weeks after completion of
treatment. Bacterial eradication and relapse were
determined by urine culture. Double-blind
procedures were maintained throughout data
collection.

25. Nilai CER pada jurnal diatas adalah :

A. 0.067
C. 22
E. 0.022
B. 0.67
D. 0.045
26. Nilai EER pada jurnal diatas :
A. 0.067
C. 22
B. 0.67
D. 0.045

E. 0.022

27. Nilai ARR pada jurnal diatas adalah :

A. 0.067
C. 22
E. 0.022
B. 0.67
D. 0.045
28. Nilai RRR pada jurnal diatas adalah :
A. 0.067
C. 22
E. 0.022
B. 0.67
D. 0.045
29. Nilai NNT pada jurnal diatas adalah :
A. 0.067
C. 22
E. 0.022
B. 0.67
D. 0.045

UTS CRP-5 2014