tbuckley/cabot-search huggingface dataset:
Skin tolerance and effectiveness of two hand decontamination procedures in everyday hospital use
Authors: M. Winnefeld, M.A. Richard, M. Drancourt, J.J. Grob
Journal: British Journal of Dermatology (2000)

Background Hand decontamination is crucial to control nosocomial infections. The utility of hand decontamination is related not only to its antimicrobial effectiveness, but also to its acceptability by hospital staff. Objectives We aimed to assess skin tolerance and antimicrobial effects of two widely accepted hand hygiene measures under in‐use conditions. Methods Fifty‐two nurses were randomly assigned for an 8‐day period to either an alcohol‐based disinfectant or a hand wash with a non‐antiseptic soap. At baseline and at the end of the test period, microbiological hand samples were obtained both before and after a hand hygiene procedure, and skin tolerance was assessed using clinical scores and measurement of transepidermal water loss. Results Self‐assessment of skin condition and grade of skin damage worsened significantly more in the group using soap than in the group using alcoholic disinfectant (P = 0·004 and P = 0·01, respectively). The alcohol‐based rinse was significantly more effective than liquid soap in removing transient contaminant micro‐organisms (P = 0·016). Twenty of 50 hand washes with non‐antiseptic soap apparently resulted in bacterial contamination of the hands. At the end of the study, the total bacterial count increased with the increasing number of hand washes in the soap group (P = 0·003), and with the degree of skin damage (P = 0·005) in the antiseptic group. Conclusions In everyday hospital practice, alcohol‐based disinfectant is more effective and better tolerated than non‐antiseptic soap; soap is at risk of spreading contamination; and skin comfort strongly influences the number and the quality of hand hygiene procedures.
Strep A, Neuropsychiatric Disorders Tie Found
Authors: J. Stephenson
Journal: JAMA (2002)

Our website uses cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing to use our site, or clicking "Continue," you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy | Continue JAMA HomeNew OnlineCurrent IssueFor Authors Publications JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry (1919-1959) Podcasts Clinical Reviews Editors' Summary Medical News Author Interviews More JN Learning / CMESubscribeJobsInstitutions / LibrariansReprints & Permissions Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Accessibility Statement 2023 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved Search All JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Forum Archive JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry Input Search Term Sign In Individual Sign In Sign inCreate an Account Access through your institution Sign In Purchase Options: Buy this article Rent this article Subscribe to the JAMA journal
Trial Labour
Authors: W. Hunter
Journal: BMJ (1938)

Unless the Recommendation to Article No. 1 of the Rules of ZoologicalNomenclature, that it is undesirable to have two genera of the same name in the zoological and botanical kingdoms, is to be regarded as a strict rule, which status it does not appear to possess.In that case the generic name here would be Plasmodium.t Similarly, if the Recoinmendation to Article No.I is to be regarded as a strict rule the generic name here would be Laverania.t In Ruling No. 104 of the International Commission on Zoological Nomen- clature (1928) no author's name is given for the specific name of this parasite.As discussed in the text, we consider that this entitles us to use P. malariae (Gr.& Fel., 1890), not P. malariae (Laveran, 1881) as so commonly employed in recent years.In short, Laveran gave the name mnalariae, not to all species of malaria parasite " in general," but to the malignant tertian parasite, which name this parasite should have rightly retained.Grassi and Feletti did not ascribe Laveran's name malariae to the qu.artan parasite, but gave their own name malariae (in the genus Haemiz- amnoeba), which name, however, sinks when one genus only is accepted to include both forms.The names praecox, inimaculatuini, and falciparum7z are all synonyms in so far as they are applied to malaria parasites of man.Acceptance of Opinion 104 of the International Com- mission* on Zoological Nomenclature offers, however, a means, based on authority, of establishing the present most commonly used names of the parasites and so avoiding the confusion which would undoubtedly arise from any attempt now to allocate correct names de jure to these parasites.Hence the most desirable names for general adoption are P. falciparunt (the malignant tertian parasite), P. malariae (the quartan parasite), and P. vivax (the benign tertian parasite).We wish to express our thanks to the Library Staffs of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, of the Royal Society of Medicine, and of' the Royal College of Surgeons, London, for the facilities they have given us to consult much of the early literature on this subject.
The Cover
Authors: Robert M. Doty
Journal: JAMA (1987)

Our website uses cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing to use our site, or clicking "Continue," you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy | Continue JAMA HomeNew OnlineCurrent IssueFor Authors Publications JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry (1919-1959) Podcasts Clinical Reviews Editors' Summary Medical News Author Interviews More JN Learning / CMESubscribeJobsInstitutions / LibrariansReprints & Permissions Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Accessibility Statement 2023 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved Search All JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Forum Archive JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry Input Search Term Sign In Individual Sign In Sign inCreate an Account Access through your institution Sign In Purchase Options: Buy this article Rent this article Subscribe to the JAMA journal
Resource utilization analysis of dose-dense methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (DD-MVAC) versus gemcitabine-cisplatin (GC) as neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC).
Authors: Kamaneh Montazeri, George Dranitsaris, Catherine Curran, Jonathan David Thomas, Matthew D. Ingham, Mark A. Preston, Graeme S. Steele, Kerry L. Kilbridge, Xiao X. Wei, Bradley Alexander McGregor, Matthew Mossanen, Guru Sonpavde
Journal: Journal of Clinical Oncology (2020)

474 Background: DD-MVAC and GC are commonly used NAC regimens for MIBC. While efficacy across studies appears similar, the resource utilization burdens have not been compared. Methods: We assessed the resource utilization and cost effectiveness of NAC with GC vs DD-MVAC for MIBC patients (pts) treated at Dana-Farber. Data on chemotherapy administered, supportive medications, relevant procedures, hospitalizations, clinic, infusion, and emergency room visits were collected retrospectively. Results: 147 patients were included, 51 in the DD-MVAC and 86 in the GC group. The two groups had similar baseline pt characteristics except lower mean age (59 vs 67 years, p&lt;0.001) and higher proportion of ECOG-PS=0 (96.1% vs 60.5%, p&lt;0.001) in the DD-MVAC group. The mean cumulative cisplatin dosages were similar (DD-MVAC=284 mg/m 2 , GC= 257 mg/m 3 ). The DD-MVAC group exhibited a greater use of G-CSF analogues (100% vs 32.6%, p &lt; 0.001), central line placement (28.6% vs 11.8%, p = 0.017), infusion visits/pt (12 vs 8), ER visits (35% vs 18%, p = 0.048), and cardiac imaging (0.98 vs 0.58/pt, p&lt;0.001). Patients receiving GC were more likely to experience delayed chemotherapy cycles (30.2% vs 9.8%, p = 0.008) and required more frequent clinic visits (9 vs 5/pt). The frequency and duration of hospitalization (23.6% vs 13.7% and 0.88 vs 0.49 days/pt, p = 0.46) and rate of grade ≥3 toxicities (32.6% vs 45.1%, p = 0.18) were numerically but not statistically different between the GC and DD-MVAC group. Cost efficacy analysis is pending and will be presented. Conclusions: DD-MVAC and GC exhibit different characteristics in terms of resource utilization as NAC for MIBC. Importantly, excess resource utilization did not clearly favor one of the regimens, although the DD-MVAC group was younger with better ECOG-PS. Given that similar overall delivery of cumulative cisplatin dosage was feasible with both regimens, the values and costs affixed to different resources may impact the selection of DD-MVAC vs GC in different regions of the world.
Correction
Journal: JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute (1997)

In a Dec. 4, 1996, News article, “Cancer Mortality Rates Fall: A Turning Point for the Nation,” it was reported that the mortality rate for Hodgkin's disease is increasing. In fact, from 1973 to 1993 the mortality rate for Hodgkin's disease declined 58.4% while the mortality rate for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma increased 36.3%.
THE SCIENTIFIC PROGRAM
Journal: JAMA (1960)

Our website uses cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing to use our site, or clicking "Continue," you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy | Continue JAMA HomeNew OnlineCurrent IssueFor Authors Publications JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry (1919-1959) Podcasts Clinical Reviews Editors' Summary Medical News Author Interviews More JN Learning / CMESubscribeJobsInstitutions / LibrariansReprints & Permissions Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Accessibility Statement 2023 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved Search All JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Forum Archive JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry Input Search Term Sign In Individual Sign In Sign inCreate an Account Access through your institution Sign In Purchase Options: Buy this article Rent this article Subscribe to the JAMA journal
Suicide by Physicians on Probation-Reply
Authors: Ralph Crawshaw
Journal: JAMA (1981)

<h3>In Reply.—</h3> Dr Valaske's criticism is both appropriate and welcome. Our study is properly faulted for not being more explicit with the psychopathology of the physicians who committed suicide. However, remembering our access to information with the Board of Medical Examiners was premised on our agreement to abide by their standards of confidentiality, which in turn are intended to avoid easy identification of any of their probationers within our relatively small state population of physicians, we stayed within the Board's sanctions. The families of those physicians who had committed suicide had had enough suffering without our local newspapers delineating the details of the psychopathology of deceased physicians, and I assure you there was high morbid interest for personal identification by the media. We recognize our fault, and one of our prime recommendations is developing a research cohort that can guarantee confidentiality, namely, that the AMA develop the computer capacity to
Three Flags
Authors: M. Therese Southgate
Journal: JAMA (2004)

Our website uses cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing to use our site, or clicking "Continue," you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy | Continue JAMA HomeNew OnlineCurrent IssueFor Authors Publications JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry (1919-1959) Podcasts Clinical Reviews Editors' Summary Medical News Author Interviews More JN Learning / CMESubscribeJobsInstitutions / LibrariansReprints & Permissions Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Accessibility Statement 2023 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved Search All JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Forum Archive JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry Input Search Term Sign In Individual Sign In Sign inCreate an Account Access through your institution Sign In Purchase Options: Buy this article Rent this article Subscribe to the JAMA journal
Erratum
Journal: BMJ (1898)

In I896 I published a "suggestion" for intestinal anastomosis; this was a bobbin which differed from a Murphy's button in several important particulars.For exaample, its lumen had about double the diameter of that of a Murphy's button; the approximation was effected by the pressure of two indiarubber rings instead of by a metal diaphragm; and again, the bobbin was very light.The instru- ment worked well on the cadaver, but on trying it on an anaesthetised dog I found so much difficulty in getting the rubber rings into place, that I decided not to use the bobbin for human surgery until oertain modifications which I am now devising are tomnlIted.Meanwhile recent experience of
The Estivo-Autumnal (Remittent) Malarial Fevers.
Journal: JAMA (1901)

Our website uses cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing to use our site, or clicking "Continue," you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy | Continue JAMA HomeNew OnlineCurrent IssueFor Authors Publications JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry (1919-1959) Podcasts Clinical Reviews Editors' Summary Medical News Author Interviews More JN Learning / CMESubscribeJobsInstitutions / LibrariansReprints & Permissions Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Accessibility Statement 2023 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved Search All JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Forum Archive JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry Input Search Term Sign In Individual Sign In Sign inCreate an Account Access through your institution Sign In Purchase Options: Buy this article Rent this article Subscribe to the JAMA journal
Long-term cost-effectiveness of various initial monotherapies for mild to moderate hypertension
Authors: J. T. Edelson
Journal: JAMA (1990)

To evaluate the comparative efficacy and cost-effectiveness of various antihypertensive medications in persons aged 35 through 64 years with diastolic blood pressure of 95 mm Hg or greater and no known coronary heart disease, we used the Coronary Heart Disease Policy Model, which is a computer simulation of overall mortality as well as the mortality, morbidity, and cost of coronary heart disease in the US population. From the pooled literature, we estimated the antihypertensive and total cholesterol effects of various antihypertensive regimens. For 20 years of simulated therapy from 1990 through 2010, the cost per year of life saved was projected to be $10 900 for propranolol hydrochloride; $16 400 for hydrochlorothiazide; $31 600 for nifedipine; $61 900 for prazosin hydrochloride; and $72 100 for captopril. Doubling the cholesterol effects of the agents under study did not significantly change their effectiveness because, in general, lowering diastolic blood pressure by 1 mm Hg was equivalent to lowering the cholesterol level by 6%. Although any projection requires multiple estimates, each of which may be open to debate, propranolol appears to be the preferred initial option under most of a variety of alternative assumptions. (<i>JAMA</i>. 1990;263:408-413)
l'Innervation périphérique. Exposé succinct de l'origine, du trajet et de la distribution des nerfs craniens et rachidiens ainsi que des nerfs du système sympathique et aperçu des phénomènes pathologiques les plus importants.
Journal: JAMA (1925)

Our website uses cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing to use our site, or clicking "Continue," you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy | Continue JAMA HomeNew OnlineCurrent IssueFor Authors Publications JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry (1919-1959) Podcasts Clinical Reviews Editors' Summary Medical News Author Interviews More JN Learning / CMESubscribeJobsInstitutions / LibrariansReprints & Permissions Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Accessibility Statement 2023 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved Search All JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Forum Archive JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry Input Search Term Sign In Individual Sign In Sign inCreate an Account Access through your institution Sign In Purchase Options: Buy this article Rent this article Subscribe to the JAMA journal
Cadmium-Binding Proteins in the Scallop Pecten maximus
Authors: H. C. Stone, S. B. Wilson, J. Overnell
Journal: Environmental Health Perspectives (1986)

Scallops, Pecten maximus, accumulate cadmium naturally in the digestive gland to a level of approximately 100 ppm wet weight.Of this cadmium, 60%o was soluble and was composed of three weight classes as judged by Sephadex G-100 chromatography.Of the soluble cadmium, 60%o was in the 55,000 molecular weight range and 20%o each in an excluded fraction and a 10,000 molecular weight fraction.The 55,000 molecular weight fraction, after further purification, showed a maximum cadmium concentration of 1.4% by weight.The cadmium was thiolate bound but not as strongly bound as in the case of metallothionein.The 10,000 molecular weight fraction was a metallothionein-like protein.
The Endocrine Society 1982 Annual Meeting—San Francisco, California June 16–18, 1982
Journal: Endocrine Reviews (1982)

Journal Article The Endocrine Society 1982 Annual Meeting—San Francisco, California June 16–18, 1982 Get access Endocrine Reviews, Volume 3, Issue 2, 1 April 1982, Pages 227–228, https://doi.org/10.1210/edrv-3-2-227 Published: 01 April 1982
ECUADOR
Journal: JAMA (1953)

Our website uses cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing to use our site, or clicking "Continue," you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy | Continue JAMA HomeNew OnlineCurrent IssueFor Authors Publications JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry (1919-1959) Podcasts Clinical Reviews Editors' Summary Medical News Author Interviews More JN Learning / CMESubscribeJobsInstitutions / LibrariansReprints & Permissions Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Accessibility Statement 2023 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved Search All JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Forum Archive JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry Input Search Term Sign In Individual Sign In Sign inCreate an Account Access through your institution Sign In Purchase Options: Buy this article Rent this article Subscribe to the JAMA journal
Histone deacetylase inhibitors modulate renal disease in the MRL-lpr/lpr mouse
Authors: Nilamadhab Mishra, Christopher M. Reilly, Doris R. Brown, Phil Ruiz, Gary S. Gilkeson
Journal: Journal of Clinical Investigation (2003)

Studies in human systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) suggest a possible role for histone deacetylases (HDACs) in skewed gene expression and disease pathogenesis. We used the MRL-lpr/lpr murine model of lupus to demonstrate that HDACs play a key role in the heightened levels of both Th1 and Th2 cytokine expression that contribute to disease. The availability of specific HDAC inhibitors (HDIs) such as trichostatin A (TSA) and suberonylanilide hydroxamic acid (SAHA) permits the study of the role of HDACs in gene regulation. Our results indicate that HDIs downregulate IL-12, IFN-γ, IL-6, and IL-10 mRNA and protein levels in MRL-lpr/lpr splenocytes. This effect on gene transcription is associated with an increased accumulation of acetylated histones H3 and H4 in total cellular chromatin. To elucidate the in vivo effects of TSA on lupuslike disease, we treated MRL-lpr/lpr mice with TSA (0.5 mg/kg/d) for 5 weeks. Compared with vehicle-treated control mice, TSA-treated mice exhibited a significant reduction in proteinuria, glomerulonephritis, and spleen weight. Taken together, these findings suggest that increased expression of HDACs leading to an altered state of histone acetylation may be of pathologic significance in MRL-lpr/lpr mice. In addition, TSA or other HDIs may have therapeutic benefit in the treatment of SLE.
Caring for the poor
Authors: Leo Uzych
Journal: JAMA (1988)

<h3>To the Editor.—</h3> The impassioned diatribe of Dr Weaver<sup>1</sup>concerning health care for the poor warrants, I believe, further comment. There is a stereotyped view held by some members of the public that some physicians practice clinical medicine in an uncaring, insensitive manner. I believe the nature of the comments made by Dr Weaver may function to kindle the flames of such a stereotype. In fact, Dr Weaver's comments may constitute a veritable textbook example of medical arrogance. Dr Weaver professes disgust with the editorial by Dr Lundberg and Mr Bodine<sup>2</sup>and the article by Dr Hilfiker.<sup>3</sup>But, ironically, Dr Weaver's letter may engender the same type of unpleasant emotion. At least in my view, to generalize about poor persons as being bums, or "dregs of humanity," who supposedly "procreate prolifically and illegitimately" and are "hopeless" and "useless" is patently crude, distasteful, and offensive. Dr Weaver's forthrightly
August 1, 2001
Journal: JAMA (2001)

Joop T. V. M. de Jong, MD, PhD; Ivan H. Komproe, PhD; Mark Van Ommeren, PhD; Mustafa El Masri, MD; Mesfin Araya, MD; Noureddine Khaled, PhD; Willem van de Put, MA; Daya Somasundaram, MD, MRCPsych