PEDIATRICS Vol. 72 No. 5 November 1983, pp. 750-751
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by WALLERSTEIN, E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by WALLERSTEIN, E.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Circumcision

EDWARD WALLERSTEIN 1

1 225 West 106th St, New York, NY 10025

To the Editor.—

The paper by Maisels et al1 circumcision calls for a response. The failure to achieve a significant reduction in the circumcision rate in a small sample (N = 23), solely in the dissemination of printed material to mothers, is not surprising. The researchers themselves suggest potential methodologic problems—whether the material was understandable, the lack of reinforcement (verbal or written), and the fact that additional information was given to the mothers from other health care sources (was it pro or con?). Such problems invalidate the study.


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