This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on ISI (1)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Diagnosis  • Alert me on articles by topic

David M. O. Becroft, MD
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology
University of Auckland
National Women's Hospital
Claude Road, Epsom
Auckland, New Zealand

Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2003;157:292.

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

Beckwith's observations are welcome. I am dismayed at the level of confusion about the definition of SIDS, which was highlighted at the 7th SIDS International Conference in Florence, Italy, in 2002. The unfortunate consequences of various well-intentioned proposals on definitions and diagnoses produce an increasing variability of international diagnostic practices and eliminate the possibility of meaningful intercountry comparisons. The effect has been an increasing reluctance of pathologists and coroners in many countries to apply the diagnosis of SIDS. The term unascertained is booming, accounting for very low rates of SIDS being reported in some countries. This has also led to an escalation of parental blame, which Beckwith has tried hard to soften.

The addition of a death scene investigation to the definition is a prime example of the caution required before changes are made. At the time the idea, aimed at providing useful additional information . . . [Full Text of this Article]

RELATED ARTICLE

Defining the Sudden Infant Death Syndrome
J. Bruce Beckwith
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2003;157(3):286-290.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT