PubMed · 7934385
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
J H Cohen. 1994-10-01. Gresham's law.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(94)92328-0
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
The introduction of West Nile (WN) virus in the northeastern United States during the summer and fall of 1999 raised the issue of preparedness of public health agencies to handle sporadic and outbreak-associated vector-borne diseases. In many local and state health departments, vector-borne disease capacity has diminished. Because it is unknown whether the virus can persist over the winter, whether it has already or will spread to new geographic locations, and the public health and animal health implications of this introduction, it is important to establish proactive laboratory-based surveillance and prevention and control programs to limit the impact of the virus in the United States. On November 8 and 9, 1999, CDC and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) cosponsored a meeting of experts representing a wide range of disciplines to review the outbreak and to provide input and guidance on the programs that should be developed to monitor WN virus activity and to prevent future outbreaks of disease. This report summarizes the guidelines established during this meeting.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the quality and concordance of methodologic criteria in abstracts versus articles regarding the diagnosis of trichomoniasis. STUDY DESIGN: Survey of published literature. DATA SOURCES: Studies indexed in MEDLINE (1976-1998). STUDY SELECTION: Studies that used culture as the gold or reference standard. DATA EXTRACTION: Data from abstract and articles were independently abstracted using 4 methodologic criteria: (1) prospective evaluation of consecutive patients; (2) test results did not influence the decision to do gold standard; (3) independent and blind comparison with gold standard; and (4) broad spectrum of patients used. The total number of criteria met for each report was calculated to create a quality score (0-4). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: None of the 33 abstracts or full articles reported all 4 criteria. Three criteria were reported in none of the abstracts and in 18% of articles (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 8.6% to 34%). Two criteria were reported in 18% of abstracts (95% CI, 8.6% to 34%) and 42% of articles (95% CI, 27% to 59%). One criterion was reported in 42% of abstracts (95% CI, 27% to 59%) and 27% of articles (95% CI, 15% to 44%). No criteria were reported in 13 (39%) of 33 abstracts (95% CI, 25% to 56%) and 4 (12%) of 33 articles (95% CI, 4.8% to 27%). The agreement of the criteria between the abstract and the article was poor (kappa -0.09; 95% CI, -0.18 to 0) to moderate (kappa 0.53; 95% CI, 0.22 to 0.83). CONCLUSIONS: Information on methods basic to study validity is often absent from both abstract and paper. The concordance of such criteria between the abstract and article needs to improve.