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
  • Reading Level
      Reading Level
      Clear All
      Reading Level
  • Content Type
      Content Type
      Clear All
      Content Type
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
      More Filters
      Clear All
      More Filters
      Item Type
    • Is Full-Text Available
    • Subject
    • Country Of Publication
    • Publisher
    • Source
    • Target Audience
    • Donor
    • Language
    • Place of Publication
    • Contributors
    • Location
2 result(s) for "Levison, Jesse"
Sort by:
U is for underwear
\"Artist and printmaker Jesse Levison brings style to the alphabet in U is for Underwear. Toddlers will keep turning the pages of this chunky board book featuring simple, vibrant, and graphic illustrations. Imbuing everyday objects with a sense of wonder, the bold artwork makes a perfect introduction to the ABCs for young pre-readers who can trace the letters with a finger and begin to understand the symbolic representation that underlies reading and writing\" -- from publisher's web site.
An Assessment of the Usefulness of the Duke Criteria for Diagnosing Active Infective Endocarditis
We evaluated the usefulness of the Duke criteria for diagnosing cases of active infective endocarditis (IE). Patients were identified prospectively over a 3-year period at 54 hospitals in the Philadelphia metropolitan area. Three of us independently reviewed abstracted hospital records and classified 410 patients as definite, probable, or possible cases of IE or as probable noncases. We then applied the Duke criteria to this sample to assess the degree of agreement between our diagnoses and the diagnoses based on these new criteria. Agreement was good to excellent, ranging from 72% to 90%, depending on the case definition used. The sensitivity of the Duke criteria was also good to excellent, varying from 71% to 99%, again depending on case definition used. Specificity was lower (0–89%). We conclude that use of the Duke criteria will result in little underdiagnosis of IE but that it may result in overdiagnosis of IE; therefore, these criteria should be applied prospectively to determine their clinical usefulness.