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?

David P. Page, Jr, MD
Baltimore, Md

JAMA. 1991;265(8):974-975.

	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. —

The study by Piper et al¹ was interesting and timely. The authors provide data to suggest that providing eligibility for public insurance is not sufficient to affect health. I agree with the sentiments of Guyer's editorial² that the maternity care system itself must be addressed, not only insurance coverage.

Still, I would like to make two points. First, the abstract by Piper et al states that "there were no concomitant improvements in... neonatal mortality." The data presented show a reduction in mortality from 5.6 per 1000 to 5.1 per 1000, an 8.9% reduction. Certainly this reduction could have been due to chance; the statistical analysis of the data does not allow one to conclude with 95% certainty that the difference was not due to chance. However, the observed improvement in neonatal mortality was significant to the 90% level of confidence, and so statistical analysis . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

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