This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on Web of Science (3)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

To the Editor.—The article by Dr Naficy and colleagues¹ regarding the potential for use of oral cholera vaccine in refugee settings may have led to invalid conclusions. At the first node of their decision tree, the authors made assumptions about a population that could benefit from either treatment or vaccine, residing in a camp with medical care provided by Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF). The representative case-fatality data were provided by MSF, a group that has much experience with cholera and from which an unusually low case-fatality rate is expected. The greatest risk factor for fatality in cholera is failure to receive care at a good treatment center; hence, the perspective of the analysis should have been of a displaced person at risk of cholera not just those who reside in an MSF camp. Many cholera epidemics in Africa have had case-fatality rates exceeding 10%,² yet the authors' sensitivity analysis . . . [Full Text of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLE

Treatment and Vaccination Strategies to Control Cholera in Sub-Saharan Refugee Settings: A Cost-effectiveness Analysis
Abdollah Naficy, Malla R. Rao, Christophe Paquet, Denise Antona, Alan Sorkin, and John D. Clemens
JAMA. 1998;279(7):521-525.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT