Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Item Type
      Item Type
      Clear All
      Item Type
  • Subject
      Subject
      Clear All
      Subject
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
3 result(s) for "Bozen Alexandria"
Sort by:
Emotional stress and reproduction: what do fertility patients believe?
PurposeTo better understand the beliefs about a causal role of emotional stress maintained by women seeking fertility care.MethodsA cross-sectional, self-administered survey was distributed to fertility care patients at an academic fertility center in Illinois. Of 5000 consecutive patients, 1460 completed the survey and were included in the study sample.ResultsMembers of our sample (N = 1460) were between 20 and 58 years (mean = 36.2, SD = 4.4). Most respondents were White (72.2%), were in a heterosexual relationship (86.8%), and felt that their physician understood their cultural background (79.4%). Of the sample, 28.9% believed emotional stress could cause infertility, 69.0% believed emotional stress could reduce success with fertility treatment, and 31.3% believed that emotional stress could cause a miscarriage, with evidence of significant racial differences. Less than a quarter (23.8%) of the sample believed emotional stress had no impact on fertility. Lower household income and educational attainment were associated with a greater belief in emotional stress as a causative factor in reproduction with regard to infertility, fertility treatment, and miscarriage.ConclusionThe majority of women seeking fertility care believe emotional stress could reduce the success of fertility treatment. Furthermore, beliefs about emotional stress and reproduction significantly differ based on race/ethnicity, income, and education. Particular attention should be paid to specific groups of women who may more likely not be aware of the lack of a proven biological relationship between emotional stress and reproduction.
Assessment of Pediatrician Awareness and Implementation of the Addendum Guidelines for the Prevention of Peanut Allergy in the United States
The 2017 Addendum Guidelines for the Prevention of Peanut Allergy in the United States recommend that pediatricians assess infant peanut allergy risk and introduce peanut in the diet at age 4 to 6 months. Early introduction has the potential to prevent peanut allergy development. To measure the rates of guideline awareness and implementation and to identify barriers to and factors associated with implementation among US pediatricians. This population-based study survey used a 29-item electronic survey instrument that was administered to pediatricians practicing across the United States from June 1, 2018, to December 1, 2018. Invitations to complete a survey were emailed to all pediatricians in the American Academy of Pediatrics vendor database. Eligible participants were nonretired US-based pediatricians providing general care to infants aged 12 months or younger. The primary outcome was the prevalence of guideline implementation, which was measured by 1 survey item about awareness followed by a second item about implementation. Secondary outcomes included identification of guidelines-focused services provided by pediatricians, knowledge of the guidelines (measured with 3 clinical scenarios), barriers to guideline implementation, need for training, and facilitators of guideline implementation. A total of 1781 pediatricians were eligible to participate and completed the entire survey. Most respondents self-identified as white (1287 [72.5%]) and female (1210 [67.4%]) individuals. Overall, 1725 (93.4%; 95% CI, 92.2%-94.5%) pediatricians reported being aware of the guidelines. Of those pediatricians who had knowledge of the guidelines, 497 (28.9%; 95% CI, 26.8%-31.1%) reported full implementation and 1105 (64.3%; 95% CI, 62.0%-66.6%) reported partial implementation. Common barriers to implementation included parental concerns about allergic reactions (reported by 575 respondents [36.6%; 95% CI, 34.3%-39.1%]), uncertainty in understanding and correctly applying the guidelines (reported by 521 respondents [33.2%; 95% CI, 30.9%-35.6%]), and conducting in-office supervised feedings (reported by 509 respondents [32.4%; 95% CI, 30.1%-34.8%]). Many pediatricians (1175 [68.4%; 95% CI, 66.1%-70.5%]) reported a need for further training on the guidelines. This survey found that most pediatrician respondents appeared to know of the 2017 guidelines, but less than one-third of respondents reported full implementation. Results of this study may inform future efforts to eliminate barriers to guideline implementation and adherence, thereby reducing the incidence of peanut allergy in infants.
Recommendations on Complementary Food Introduction Among Pediatric Practitioners
The American Academy of Pediatrics and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommend waiting 3 to 5 days between the introduction of new complementary foods (solid foods introduced to infants <12 months of age), yet with advances in the understanding of infant food diversity, the guidance that pediatric practitioners are providing to parents is unclear. To characterize pediatric practitioner recommendations regarding complementary food introduction and waiting periods between introducing new foods. In this survey study, a 23-item electronic survey on complementary food introduction among infants was administered to pediatric health care professionals from February 1 to April 30, 2019. Responses were described among the total sample and compared among subgroups. Survey invitations were emailed to 2215 members of the Illinois Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics and the national American Academy of Pediatrics' Council on Early Childhood. Participants were required to be primary medical practitioners, such as physicians, resident physicians, or nurse practitioners, providing pediatric care to infants 12 months or younger. The main outcome measures were recommendations on age of complementary food introduction and waiting periods between the introduction of new foods. Categorical survey items were reported as numbers (percentages) and 95% CIs. Means (SDs) were used to describe continuous survey items. The survey was sent to 2215 practitioners and completed by 604 (response rate, 27.3%). Of these respondents, 41 were excluded because they did not provide care for infants or pediatric patients. The final analyses included responses from 563 surveys. Of these, 454 pediatricians (80.6%), 85 resident physicians (15.1%), and 20 nurse practitioners (3.6%) completed the survey. Only 217 practitioners (38.6%; 95% CI, 34.1%-44.6%) recommended waiting 3 days or longer between food introduction; 259 practitioners (66.3%; 95% CI, 61.4%-70.8%) recommended waiting that amount of time for infants at risk for food allergy development (P = .02). A total of 264 practitioners (46.9%; 95% CI, 42.8%-51.0%) recommended infant cereal as the first food, and 226 practitioners (40.1%; 95% CI, 36.1%-44.2%) did not recommend a specific order. A total of 268 practitioners (47.6%; 95% CI, 43.5%-51.7%) recommended food introduction at 6 months for exclusively breastfed (EBF) infants, and 193 (34.3%; 95% CI, 30.5%-38.3%) recommended food introduction at 6 months for non-EBF infants (P < .001); 179 practitioners (31.8%; 95% CI, 28.1%-35.8%) recommended food introduction at 4 months for EBF infants, and 239 practitioners (42.5%; 95% CI, 38.4%-46.6%) recommended food introduction at 4 months for non-EBF infants (P < .001). A need for additional training on complementary food introduction was reported by 310 practitioners (55.1%; 95% CI, 50.9%-59.1%). In this survey study, most pediatric practitioners did not counsel families to wait 3 days or longer between introducing foods unless infants were at risk for food allergy development. The findings suggest that the current recommendation limits infant food diversity and may delay early peanut introduction. Because the approach to food allergy prevention has changed, a reevaluation of published feeding guidelines may be necessary.