PubMed · 16468430
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Michael Shermer. 2006. Murdercide.. https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0106-34
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the organisms causing neonatal sepsis and their modifications over an extended period, to assess their changing sensitivities to antibiotics and to verify whether the policy for screening pregnant women for group B streptococci (GBS) carriage is desirable in our settings. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Medical records of all infants with positive blood culture from the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit at Salmaniya Medical Complex between 1991 and 2001 and Bahrain Defense Force Hospital between 1999 and 2001 were reviewed. RESULTS: Of the 7,978 neonates in both hospitals 335 (4.19%) had culture-proven bacteremia. Gram-positive bacteria were isolated at constant rate over the 11-year period. The main agents isolated were coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (CoNS) in 138 cases (41%), Staphylococcus aureus in 28 newborns (8%) and GBS in 26 patients (7.8%, 0.2/1,000 live births). All of them were sensitive to penicillin G, erythromycin and clindamycin. Gram-negative bacteria were declining but Escherichia coli was isolated in 35 cases (10%). Of special concern is the increasing percentage (5.7%) of Candida isolation. No clear trend toward increasing resistance was observed, although a major difference among the two institutions was evident. Klebsiella and Enterobacter spp. showed resistance to many of the antibiotics tested, thereby posing difficult therapeutic choices. CONCLUSION: Good quality specimens are essential to evaluate the role of CoNS. The increasing threat of fungal infection must be carefully tackled. Specifically tailored policies for GBS prevention must be defined according to the local epidemiology.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
OBJECTIVE: To identify reports of randomized trials by handsearching 2 Bahrain medical journals, which are indexed in the biomedical database EMBASE and to determine any added value of the handsearching by comparing the reports found by handsearching with what would have been found by searching EMBASE to examine (i) the precision and sensitivity of the EMBASE index term Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) and (ii) The Cochrane Collaboration's systematic electronic search of EMBASE (which uses 4 index terms and 9 free-text terms). METHODS: All issues of the Bahrain Medical Bulletin (BMB) (1979-2004) and the Journal of the Bahrain Medical Society (JBMS) (1989-2004) were handsearched in February 2005 for reports of RCTs or Controlled Clinical Trials (CCTs), according to Cochrane eligibility criteria. RESULTS: Out of 395 articles in BMB we found reports of 12 RCTs and 4 CCTs. Distribution by country of corresponding author: Jordan (4 RCTs, one CCT), Bahrain (one RCT, one CCT), India (3 RCTs, one CCT), Kuwait (one CCT), Saudi Arabia (2 RCTs), USA/Bahrain (one RCT), and Oman (one RCT); and by specialty: Anesthesia (8), Surgery (1) Pediatrics (1), Radiotherapy (1), Community Medicine (1), Sports Medicine (1), Obstetrics/Gynecology (3). The Journal of the Bahrain Medical Society included reports of 14 RCTs and 3 CCTs, out of 97 articles. Distribution by country of corresponding author: Jordan (9 RCTs, 2 CCTs), Bahrain (3 RCTs), Egypt (one RCT), Kuwait (one RCT), and Saudi Arabia (one RCT); and by specialty: Anesthesia (7), General Surgery (3), Obstetrics/Gynecology (1), Radiotherapy (1), Pediatrics (1), Orthopaedic Surgery (1), Education (1) Ear Nose and Throat (1) Ophthalmology (1). Overall, of the 33 reports of trials found by handsearching both journals, only 23 were included in EMBASE of which only 6 had been indexed with the term RCT. Of the 23 reports of trials included in EMBASE, 16 had been identified in the Collaboration s systematic search of EMBASE. Two reports of trials could have been retrieved by this search but there was insufficient information in the title and abstract to code these as trials. The EMBASE records for the remaining 5 reports of trials did not contain terms currently used by The Cochrane Collaboration to identify reports of randomized trials in this database. CONCLUSION: The handsearching of these journals will help minimize publication bias by locating randomized trials not previously identified and, through their inclusion in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, will ensure reports of randomized trials will not remain buried through indexing bias.