Title: “The Cost and Benefits of Reviving the National Children’s Study: A Consultation for a California Senator” 1) The National Children’s Study (NCS) was originally designed as a longitudinal study, which would follow a large

Read:
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/06/lawmakers-seek-resurrect-national-children-s-studyLinks to an external site.
https://undark.org/article/the-death-of-a-study-national-childrens-study/Links to an external site.Links to an external site.
Because of your expertise in research methods, you are hired by a California senator as a consultant. She wants your opinion on whether she should vote to resurrect funding for the National Children’s Study. She is concerned because the funding for this program has already cost taxpayers over 1 billion dollars and the researchers would require ~ $200,000,000 per year. Because there is only a limited amount of funding for research, funding the National Children’s Study means that other important scientific research will not receive money.
You need to:
1) determine whether the National Children’s Study could be conducted as a cross-sectional study (which would be considerably less expensive). Would the goals of the study be achievable?
2) Provide advice about whether or not the senator should vote for funding it as either a cross-sectional study or a longitudinal study. What are the pros and cons of conducting this research cross-sectionally and longitudinally? FYI: you cannot choose longitudinal sequential
Please limit your response to 300 words.