Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

H Glick

Publications and source records attributed to H Glick.

38 records · Page 3Linked to original sources

Blood lead in children and its determinants in Nagpur, India.

In a community-based cross-sectional study of 297 children aged 6 months to 6 years in an Indian city, the authors assessed the prevalence of elevated (> or = 10 microg/dL) blood lead (PbB) levels, their risk factors, and the lead contents in potential environmental sources. Mean PbB was 18.4 microg/dL +/- 16.5. The prevalence of elevated PbB was 67%. Anticipated risk factors for elevated PbB were living in houses painted with lead-based paint, odds ratio (OR) 6.42 (1.75, 23.6; p = 0.005), recent exposures to lead-based paint, OR 2.61 (1.07, 6.66; p = 0.03), and the use of the eye cosmetic ma," OR 2.63 (1.24, 5.56; p = 0.01). Unanticipated results were effect of upper caste as a risk factor, OR (adjusted) 1.85 (95% CI = 0.96, 3.57; p = 0.06), and the lack of effect of traffic, parental occupational exposure, or nutritional status. Analysis of various environmental sources such as paint, pencils, crayons, and clay revealed high lead levels. These results demonstrate the existence of a major environmental health problem in Indian children, with risk factors that differ from those in other countries.

Child↗

Explaining cost variations in clinical trials using severity of illness measures.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the usefulness of severity of illness measures in explaining the variation in costs observed in economic analyses of clinical trials. METHOD: Hospital costs and three severity of illness measures (Medical Illness Severity Grouping System [MedisGroups], Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation [APACHE] II, APACHE III) were calculated for patients undergoing surgical management of gastrointestinal malignancies. Regression models were developed to determine the predictive ability of the severity of illness measures on total costs and length of stay of surgical patients. RESULTS: There was not a significant reduction in the cost variance among patients after correcting for severity with use of the MedisGroups score. APACHE II scores were a better predictor of total costs, although this relationship did not reach statistical significance. As a continuous variable, APACHE III scores explained $326 of extra cost for each point on the scale, and as a categorical variable, identified those patients who were most expensive to care for and with long lengths of stay. CONCLUSION: Neither MedisGroups nor APACHE II were found to be useful in explaining cost variations in a clinical trial. The APACHE III system was more useful in discriminating resource intensive patients.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗