| Course | HS340 Epidemiology |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 10 |
| Paper type | Epidemiology case report |
| Length | About 1,120 words, 7 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | BS in Health Science |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for HS340 Unit 10
Fried Rice Held Overnight: A Unit 10 Epidemiology Case Report on Vomiting After a Composite Graduation Banquet
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
HS340: Epidemiology
Unit 10 Epidemiology Case Report
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The banquet, the attendees and every count are composite; the review of the organism, the causation criteria and the field manual cited are real.
Summary
On a Friday evening in May, [312] people attended a graduation banquet catered by a local restaurant. By midnight, the college's on-call nurse had received a dozen calls about vomiting and stomach cramps. A retrospective cohort study of [240] attendees found that [64] met the case definition, with a median onset of two and a half hours after the meal. Illness was strongly associated with eating fried rice, risk ratio 5.8. Leftover rice grew Bacillus cereus at high counts. The rice had been cooked the afternoon before, cooled slowly at room temperature and reheated in a warming cabinet. No one was hospitalized.
Background
Bacillus cereus causes two forms of food poisoning. The emetic form, caused by a toxin produced in food before it is eaten, brings vomiting within about a half hour to six hours and is classically linked to cooked rice left at warm temperatures; the diarrheal form starts later and is linked to a wider range of foods (Bottone, 2010). The toxin survives reheating, so reheating rice that has been held too long does not make it safe.
Measurement
Case definition: an attendee who developed vomiting, or at least two of nausea, abdominal cramps and diarrhea, within 24 hours after the banquet.
The definition was written before the food history was analyzed, so that the choice of foods could not shape who counted as ill. It was broad enough to include people with mild illness who did not call anyone.
Case finding used the guest list supplied by the college. Health department staff called or emailed all [312] attendees over four days and reached [240], 76.9 percent. Each was asked about symptoms, onset time and every food and drink served.
Onset times ran from one to five hours after the meal began, with a median of two and a half hours. That short, tight distribution points to a toxin already present in the food rather than an infection, which would take a day or more to cause symptoms.
Design
Because the exposed group was a defined guest list, the investigation used a retrospective cohort design, comparing attack rates among people who ate and did not eat each item. Had the guest list been unknown, or the crowd too big to reach, cases would have been compared with well controls instead (Rasmussen & Goodman, 2019). A cohort has one advantage worth naming: it gives attack rates and risk ratios directly, which are easier for a restaurant owner or a college dean to understand than odds ratios.
Food-specific attack rates:
Fried rice: of [150] who ate it, [58] ill, 38.7 percent; of [90] who did not, [6] ill, 6.7 percent. Risk ratio 5.8. Grilled chicken: of [196] who ate it, [54] ill, 27.6 percent; of [44] who did not, [10] ill, 22.7 percent. Risk ratio 1.2. Green salad: of [171] who ate it, [44] ill, 25.7 percent; of [69] who did not, [20] ill, 29.0 percent. Risk ratio 0.9. Sheet cake: of [208] who ate it, [56] ill, 26.9 percent; of [32] who did not, [8] ill, 25.0 percent. Risk ratio 1.1.
Only the fried rice separates the ill from the well: almost everyone who got sick ate it, and the few who ate none of it rarely got sick, while every other food shows attack rates within a few points of each other.
For fried rice, the 95 percent confidence interval for the risk ratio, computed on the log scale, runs from 2.6 to 12.9, well above 1.
Laboratory and Environmental Findings
Leftover fried rice, refrigerated by the caterer after the event, grew Bacillus cereus at more than one hundred thousand colony-forming units per gram, a level associated with illness. Stool testing is not routinely used for this organism, since it can be found in healthy people, and none was done. The other leftover foods did not grow the organism at significant levels.
A visit to the restaurant found that the rice for [312] people had been cooked in four large batches at about 2 p.m. on Thursday, left in the pots on the counter until the evening shift ended, then refrigerated in deep containers. On Friday it was stir-fried with vegetables and held in a warming cabinet from 4 p.m. until service at 7 p.m. The cabinet's thermometer read below the safe hot-holding temperature when inspectors checked it.
Inference
Several lines of evidence point to the rice. The association is strong, a risk ratio of 5.8. People who ate two or more servings of rice had an attack rate of [51] percent against [31] percent for one serving, a gradient consistent with dose. The short incubation fits a preformed toxin. The organism was found in the food at a level known to cause illness, and the preparation history explains how it got there. These are several of the considerations Hill proposed for judging whether an association is causal: strength, a biological gradient, plausibility and coherence with other evidence (Hill, 1965).
The evidence has limits. A quarter of attendees were not reached, and those reached may have been more likely to have been ill. Memory of what was eaten at a buffet is imperfect. And the six ill people who reported eating no rice may have forgotten a spoonful or had an unrelated illness.
Control Measures and Recommendations
The restaurant agreed to cook rice the same day it is served, to cool any rice that must be held in shallow pans in the refrigerator within two hours, and to replace the faulty warming cabinet. The health department reinspected two weeks later and found the changes in place. Staff also checked whether the restaurant had catered other events that week from the same batches of rice, and found one small office lunch on the Friday; none of the eleven people at that lunch reported illness, which fits with their rice having been taken from the warming cabinet within an hour of reheating, before toxin levels could build further. A short notice to other caterers in the county reminded them that rice cooked ahead is a common source of this illness.
Conclusion
A point-source outbreak of emetic Bacillus cereus food poisoning followed a graduation banquet. A cohort study of attendees implicated fried rice, the laboratory confirmed the organism in leftovers, and the kitchen's practices explained why. The outbreak ended with the meal, and the restaurant changed how it cools and holds rice.
References
Bottone, E. J. (2010). Bacillus cereus, a volatile human pathogen. Clinical Microbiology Reviews, 23(2), 382-398. https://doi.org/10.1128/CMR.00073-09
Hill, A. B. (1965). The environment and disease: Association or causation? Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine, 58(5), 295-300. https://doi.org/10.1177/003591576505800503
Rasmussen, S. A., & Goodman, R. A. (Eds.). (2019). The CDC field epidemiology manual. Oxford University Press.
Reading the HS 340 Unit 10 instructions
Unit 10 closes the course with a full investigation report, organized around measurement, study design and causal inference, often in the format of a state epidemiology bulletin. Reports commonly run eight to ten pages. Instructors look for a written case definition, an explanation of why the chosen design fits the setting, a measure of association with a confidence interval, laboratory or environmental evidence where available and an inference section that weighs the evidence and its limits. Many sections reward recommendations that follow from the findings and a follow-up check that they were adopted. Cite a field manual for the steps, a source on the organism and a framework for causal judgment.
Inside the HS340 Unit 10 example
A summary paragraph gives the whole investigation in brief. Background describes the organism's two forms and why reheating does not help. The measurement section gives the case definition, explains why it was written before analysis, reports contact with attendees and reads the onset times. The design section justifies a retrospective cohort and lists attack rates for four foods; the highlighted sentence reads the table for the one item that separates ill from well, and the confidence interval follows. Laboratory and kitchen findings come next. The inference section applies Hill's considerations, including a dose gradient, then names three limits. Control measures, a reinspection and a check of another catered event lead to a short conclusion.
HS340 Unit 10 rubric: what earns full points
Case reports are typically scored on measurement, design, analysis, inference, recommendations and presentation. Inference and the analysis usually carry the largest share, because the final unit asks whether a student can move from data to a defensible causal judgment. Measurement credit goes to a clear case definition and a reasoned reading of incubation. Design points reward a choice that fits the setting, with the alternative named. Analysis is judged on correct attack rates, a measure of association and an interval. Inference earns most when several kinds of evidence are weighed together and limits are stated. Recommendations should follow from the findings. A bulletin-style layout with a summary first makes every section easy to find.
Common HS340 Unit 10 mistakes, and how to avoid them
A frequent problem is a report that lists attack rates without saying which food separates the ill from the well. Another is choosing a case-control design when a full guest list makes a cohort possible. Some students claim proof from a laboratory result alone, or ignore a strong laboratory finding in favor of the statistics. Others skip the incubation reading, which often narrows the cause quickly. Recommendations that do not follow from the findings weaken the ending. If your outbreak is different, perhaps a waterborne cluster or an illness at a camp, send the data and we can help you organize it under measurement, design and inference with a conclusion you can defend.
Get an HS340 Unit 10 example written to your instructions
Send whatever the HS340 Unit 10 project supplies, whether a line list, a scenario or a dataset, together with the final directions and rubric. The desk measures the excess, justifies the design and sizes the conclusion to the evidence. A free first custom sample follows in 24-48 hours, every figure shown with its counts. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
More HS340 papers and BS in Health Science samples
- HS340 Unit 1: Surveillance Discussion Post
- HS340 Unit 2: Rate Calculation Set
- HS340 Unit 3: Study Design Appraisal
- HS340 Unit 4: Two by Two Table
- HS340 Unit 5: Bias and Confounding Memo
- HS340 Unit 6: Outbreak Investigation Writeup
- HS340 Unit 7: Seminar Reflection on an Outbreak
- HS340 Unit 8: Screening Test Analysis
- HS340 Unit 9: Surveillance Data Review
- HS315 Unit 10: Public Health Program Proposal
- HS305 Unit 10: Research Proposal Outline
- HS292 Unit 10: Dog Bite Coding Case Report
- HS450 Unit 10: Strategic Plan
HS340 Unit 10 questions, answered
Does the case report need an original analysis or can it summarize?
Most final prompts expect analysis: a rate, a measure of association and an interpretation that connects them. Summaries of published investigations rarely meet that bar unless the prompt asks for one. Where data are supplied, work from them; where they are not, a composite scenario like the fair outbreak lets the report show every step with numbers a grader can recompute.
Where can I find a free HS340 Unit 10 sample paper?
This page shows the complete Unit 10 epidemiology case report, a cohort investigation of vomiting after a composite graduation banquet.
Why use a cohort design for a banquet outbreak?
Because the guest list defines everyone exposed, so attack rates and risk ratios can be calculated directly for each food.
What does a short incubation period suggest?
Onset within a few hours points to a toxin already formed in the food, as with emetic Bacillus cereus or staphylococcal poisoning, rather than an infection that must grow first.
What are Hill's considerations?
Points proposed in 1965 for judging whether an association is causal, including strength, consistency, temporality, a dose gradient, plausibility and coherence with other evidence.