This Article  • 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?

Riccardo Haupt, MD
G. Gaslini Institute Genoa, Italy

Lonnie Zeltzer, MD
UCLA Medical Center Los Angeles, Calif

Julianne Byrne, PhD
Children's National Medical Center Washington, DC

JAMA. 1995;274(14):1134-1135.

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

In Reply.

—The skewed age distribution is not due to an atypical sample or to poorer survival of younger children, but is due simply to the fact that ALL survival started to improve only during the 1970s. Thus, by 1989, when the interview was conducted, subjects treated at a young age were still not old enough to be eligible. Since we were interested in events of adulthood, we would have to wait another 10 years, until 1999, for the survival cohort to resemble an incidence cohort.

With regard to the concern about the measures of scholastic achievement, we expect that the "rigor of academic programs" would be equally distributed across survivors and controls, especially because so many different schools are represented across many states in this study. We did not attempt to obtain verification of subjects' reported grades in school; in fact, the reliability of self-report data should be equally . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

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