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

Patrick Casey, MD; Kelly J. Kellener, MD, MPH
Center for Applied Research and Evaluation Department of Pediatrics University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences Arkansas Children's Hospital 800 Marshall St Little Rock, AR 72202

Robert H. Bradley, PhD; Kimberlea W. Kellogg, MBA; Russell S. Kirby, PhD, MS; Leanne Whiteside, MS
Little Rock

Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1995;149(9):1041.

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

Drs Karp and Wadoski do not appear to dispute the major findings of our recent publication; rather, they attempt to explain why the Infant Health and Development Program intervention failed to decrease the incidence of FTT in this low-birth-weight (LBW) population.¹ This occurred, they believe, because most of the subjects did not in fact have FTT and also because nutrition was not a major factor in influencing growth in these infants.

Regarding the diagnosis of FTT in our subjects, Drs Karp and Wadoski are unhappy with our case definition. Because of the absence of a uniformly accepted definition of FTT in the clinical and research literature, we developed a case definition that we believed was cautious in requiring (1) clinician identification, (2) documentation of low weight for gender and gestation-corrected age on more than one occasion, and (3) less than expected growth velocity. We stand by this . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

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