Submited on: 01 Feb 2012 09:18:31 AM GMT
Published on: 01 Feb 2012 07:51:07 PM GMT
 
Review
Posted by Ms. Laura Warmington on 22 Mar 2012 09:02:01 PM GMT

1 Is the subject of the article within the scope of the subject category? Yes
2 Are the interpretations / conclusions sound and justified by the data? Yes
3 Is this a new and original contribution? Yes
4 Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic? Yes
5 Are structure and length satisfactory? Yes
6 Can you suggest brief additions or amendments or an introductory statement that will increase the value of this paper for an international audience? Yes
7 Can you suggest any reductions in the paper, or deletions of parts? No
8 Is the quality of the diction satisfactory? Yes
9 Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable? Yes
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    The article illuminates the imortance for more varied research in screening and treating GBS positive women in pregnancy. At this time I feel more research needs to be done but that this article opens the door for more discussion.  I had a few questions when reading the article about the author's explanation of water birth. If the author states that water birth may be one way to decrease the risk of infection in newborns I thought it would be helpful if she explained how this may be and what steps needed to be followed for this outsome. She mentions the water is warm but does not give a tempreture. If her claims are to be followed then more explanation seems necessary. 

  • Competing interests:
    no
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    Registered Nurse

  • How to cite:  Warmington L .Review[Review of the article 'Is CDC GBS Protocol for Performing Rectovaginal Culture for GBS at 35-37 Weeks of Pregnancy and Subsequent Antibiotic Prophylaxis for Full Term GBS Positive Women Biased? Critical Analysis of: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention of Perinatal Group B Streptococcal Disease. ' by Cohain J].WebmedCentral 2012;3(3):WMCRW001613
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
CDC GBS Protocol
Posted by Mrs. Molly Wesman on 16 Mar 2012 02:43:11 PM GMT

1 Is the subject of the article within the scope of the subject category? Yes
2 Are the interpretations / conclusions sound and justified by the data? Yes
3 Is this a new and original contribution? Yes
4 Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic? Yes
5 Are structure and length satisfactory? Yes
6 Can you suggest brief additions or amendments or an introductory statement that will increase the value of this paper for an international audience? No
7 Can you suggest any reductions in the paper, or deletions of parts? No
8 Is the quality of the diction satisfactory? Yes
9 Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable? Yes
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    I am grateful for Ms. Cohain's insightful critique of the current CDC recommendations.  Even if no further published studies citing alternative protocols are extant, the logical conclusions to avoid poor advice would seem prima facie.  Warm water births, as with all innovative procedures, would likely gain greater acceptance if more research would be conducted to adequately evaluate the associated risk factors.  It would appear that the author acknowledges as much by concluding, “the evidence to date…”, implying that more thorough research aught to be done.

  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    GBS research

  • How to cite:  Wesman M .CDC GBS Protocol[Review of the article 'Is CDC GBS Protocol for Performing Rectovaginal Culture for GBS at 35-37 Weeks of Pregnancy and Subsequent Antibiotic Prophylaxis for Full Term GBS Positive Women Biased? Critical Analysis of: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention of Perinatal Group B Streptococcal Disease. ' by Cohain J].WebmedCentral 2012;3(3):WMCRW001594
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

1 Is the subject of the article within the scope of the subject category? Yes
2 Are the interpretations / conclusions sound and justified by the data? Partly
3 Is this a new and original contribution? Yes
4 Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic? Yes
5 Are structure and length satisfactory? Yes
6 Can you suggest brief additions or amendments or an introductory statement that will increase the value of this paper for an international audience? No
7 Can you suggest any reductions in the paper, or deletions of parts? Yes
8 Is the quality of the diction satisfactory? Yes
9 Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable? No
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    This is an opinion paper critical of the CDC recommendations. The point is made that the recommendations are not well-supported by the results in published studies. However, the author does not cite any literature to support different recommendations.

     

    The photograph does not add any value to the paper.

  • Competing interests:
    None
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    Specialist in Infectious Diseases

  • How to cite:  Herchline T .CDC Protocol for Prevention of Perinatal Group B Streptococcal Disease[Review of the article 'Is CDC GBS Protocol for Performing Rectovaginal Culture for GBS at 35-37 Weeks of Pregnancy and Subsequent Antibiotic Prophylaxis for Full Term GBS Positive Women Biased? Critical Analysis of: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention of Perinatal Group B Streptococcal Disease. ' by Cohain J].WebmedCentral 2012;3(2):WMCRW001469
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
The photograph documents a baby being born in the sac, which many practitioners have never seen, and is therefore instructive for them.
Responded by Ms. Judy S Cohain on 09 Feb 2012 09:22:02 AM