Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Circumcision study flaws

266 bytes removed, 06:59, 31 December 2021
m
using template:RCT Gray et al 2007
}}</ref> so there is intense interest in keeping the Goose alive. [[Third-party payment]] is frequently available in the United States.
Several state Medicaid programs stopped paying for non-therapeutic circumcision in the early in the 21st Century. It is believed that this caused alarm in the circumcision industry. Shortly after ''The Lancet'' published two reports on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from sub-Saharan Africa,<ref name="bailey2007">{{RCT Bailey et al 2007}}</ref><ref name="gray2007">{{REFjournal |last=RCT Gray |init=RH |author-link=Ronald H. Gray |last2=Kigozi |init2=G |last3=Serwadda |init3=D |etal=yes |title=Male circumcision for HIV prevention in men in Rakai, Uganda: A randomised trial |journal=Lancet |date=et al 2007 |volume=369 |issue=9562 |pages=657-666}}</ref> it was announced in 2007 that the [[American Academy of Pediatrics]] (AAP) would take the lead, in association with the [[American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists| American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists]] (ACOG) and the [[American Academy of Family Physicians]] {AAFP}, these being the three trade associations (stakeholders) whose members perform most of the non-therapeutic circumcisions, in developing a new circumcision policy for America.<ref>{{REFjournal
|title=AAP reviews policy on circumcision
|journal=Relias Media
administrator, administrators, Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators
22,335
edits

Navigation menu