The Epidemiology course provided the foundation for defining precise inclusion and exclusion criteria, selecting appropriate study designs, and assessing bias in my practicum. Learning objectives such as identifying relevant public health problems and formulating them in testable scientific terms guided my initial framing of the review question. The major assignment requiring a public health brief honed my ability to communicate complex epidemiologic concepts to non-specialist audiences, a skill that translated to writing the policy recommendations in my manuscript. Through module tests and reflections, I strengthened my capacity to identify confounding variables and apply strategies for mitigating bias, ensuring methodological rigor in my synthesis. Training in descriptive and analytic epidemiology allowed me to stratify findings by demographic variables, improving the precision and applicability of results. The epidemiologic grant review assignment developed my ability to critically evaluate proposed research, which was mirrored in my appraisal of included studies’ methodological strengths and weaknesses. Exposure to different study designs (cohort, case-control, cross-sectional) improved my judgment in weighing evidence quality during synthesis. Overall, this course reinforced the importance of validity, reliability, and generalizability—principles embedded in every decision of my review process.