15,498
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Confounding factors to Wiswell's work: Wikify.
|issue=1
|pages=123-132
}}</ref> so the majority of its young male client population would have necessarily remained [[intact]]. The observation that 95% of the boys were not [[circumcised]], therefore, indicated nothing more than that the majority of male infant patients at Parkland Hospital were not circumcised.
Wiswell's retrospective reviews of old hospital records failed to take a few factors into account:
}}</ref> There is a significant false-positive rate in diagnosing UTI when [[urine]] cultures alone are used.<ref name="Mueller 1997"/><ref name="Saez-Llorens 1989"/> This criticism was addressed to some extent in Wiswell's second review.<ref name="Wiswell 1986"/>
* The hospital chart data used in the retrospective studies are unreliable. Hospitals frequently omit to record a [[circumcision ]] on a baby's chart. In Atlanta, O'Brien found that circumcision was recorded only 84.3% of the time for circumcised boys.<ref>{{REFjournal
|last=O'Brien
|init=TR
|issue=88
|pages=411-415
}}</ref> If the records used in the retrospective bacteriuria studies are similarly inaccurate, then a statistically significant number of the infants with bacteriuria that were claimed to be [[intact ]] were, in fact, [[circumcised]]. This would naturally overstate the rate of infection in intact boys.<ref>{{REFjournal
|last=Van Howe
|init=RS