Epidemiology Commons^™

Antibiotics For Leptospirosis, David Brett-Major, Rodney Coldren

Journal Articles: Epidemiology

BACKGROUND: Leptospirosis has a wide-ranging clinical and public health impact. Leptospira are globally distributed. Case attack rates are as high as 1:4 to 2:5 persons in exposed populations. In some settings mortality has exceeded 10% of infected people. The benefit of antibiotic therapy in the disease has been unclear.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to characterise the risks and benefits associated with use of antibiotic therapy in the management of leptospirosis.

SEARCH METHODS: We searched the The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded …

Antibiotic Prophylaxis For Leptospirosis, David Brett-Major, Robert J. Lipnick

Journal Articles: Epidemiology

BACKGROUND: Leptospira infection is a global zoonosis with significant health impact for agricultural workers and those persons whose work or recreation takes them into endemic areas.

OBJECTIVES: This systematic review assessed the current literature for evidence for or against use of antibiotic prophylaxis against Leptospira infection (leptospirosis).

SEARCH STRATEGY: The authors searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and SCI-Expanded as well as relevant professional society meeting abstracts until January 2009.

SELECTION CRITERIA: Prospective, randomised clinical trials studying antibiotic prophylaxis against leptospirosis were selected.

DATA …

Changes In Beliefs Identify Unblinding In Randomized Controlled Trials: A Method To Meet Consort Guidelines, Judy R. Rees, Timothy J. Wade, Deborah A. Levy, John M. Colford, Joan F. Hilton

Journal Articles: Epidemiology

Double-blinded trials are often considered the gold standard for research, but significant bias may result from unblinding of participants and investigators. Although the CONSORT guidelines discuss the importance of reporting "evidence that blinding was successful", it is unclear what constitutes appropriate evidence. Among studies reporting methods to evaluate blinding effectiveness, many have compared groups with respect to the proportions correctly identifying their intervention at the end of the trial. Instead, we reasoned that participants' beliefs, and not their correctness, are more directly associated with potential bias, especially in relation to self-reported health outcomes. During the Water Evaluation Trial performed in …