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

Samuel Sepkowitz, MD
Deaconess Hospital University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center Oklahoma City

JAMA. 1982;248(12):1451.

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

To the Editor.—

In a recent editorial about infant mortality (1982;247: 1027), Paneth warns about the hazards of comparing infant mortality rates between countries; he notes how irregularly birth weights are recorded throughout the world, and states that "crude mortality rates are, more often than not, profoundly misleading."

Paying little heed to his own warnings, he proceeds to place the United States back into an international infant mortality race where it ties for 16th place. To complete the invidious comparison, he cites a relatively high rate of infant mortality in the United States and the superior size and gestational age of European and Japanese counterparts.

These attempts to use crude birth weights and birth-weight-specific mortality rates are misleading and inappropriate. Many countries report incomplete or provisional data for mortality of infants weighing less than 1,000 g, the weight group in which the largest number of deaths occurs. And skepticism shades . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

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