RESUMEN
CONTEXT: Periodontal disease (PD) is a common infection in the community; however, its relationship with low birth weight (LBW) has not been well-established. AIMS: The aim was to determine the association between maternal PD and LBW. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: A case-control (1:1) study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study population comprised of women who delivered at the hospital during the study period (September 2011 to February 2012).Women between 18 and 35 years of age, who delivered singleton, live infants during study period with at least 18 teeth were enrolled. Those with pregnancy induced hypertension, gestational diabetes, blood-borne viral infections, periodontal treatment within the past 6 months and valvular heart disease were excluded. Control population was parity matched to the cases. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Chi-square test, t-test and univariant and multivariant logistic regression were used to analyze various study findings, and level of significance was set at 5% (P<0.05). RESULTS: PD was independently associated with LBW (odds ratio: 4.94, 95% confidence interval: 1.03-23.65, P=0.045). Additionally, conventional risk factors such as maternal height (P=0.029), secondary schooling (<8 years of schooling) (P=0.001), socio-economic status (P=0.046), type of family (joint) (P=0.008), number of ante-natal visits (P=0.028) and gestational age at birth (<37 weeks) (P=0.045) showed significant association with LBW. CONCLUSIONS: There seems to be an association between PD and LBW independent of conventional risk factors. Women who had PD were 5 times more likely to deliver LBW infants.
Asunto(s)
Recién Nacido de Bajo Peso , Enfermedades Periodontales/complicaciones , Adolescente , Adulto , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Femenino , Humanos , Recién Nacido , Embarazo , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: There is considerable gender disparity in editorial boards of medical journals. Being an editor in a Cochrane review group (CRG), like being an editor in a medical journal, is an indirect representation of one's reputation and leadership abilities in a particular specialty. The aim of the study was to analyze the representation of women editors on the editorial teams of CRG's and the Central Editorial Unit (CEU) of the Cochrane Collaboration. METHODS: Information about editorial team members of CRGs and the CEU was extracted from respective websites. Gender of the individual was determined by inspection of names, individual profile description or photographs in the CRG or institutional webpage, social networking sites and internet search. Data was validated by two authors independently and differences sorted by consensus. RESULTS: A total of 788 editors across all CRGs and the CEU with an overall 371 females (47.1%) and 417 (52.9%) males were identified. of the CEU editors, 62.5% were females. There were 68 coordinating editors (35.3% females), and 62 managing editors (56% females), who provided leadership to the CRGs. Eighty-four percent of trial search coordinators were found to be females. Ten CRGs had 75% or more of its editors as females while 7 CRGs had less than or equal to 25% female editors. CONCLUSIONS: The representation of women editors in the Cochrane Collaboration was found to be better than in editorial boards of medical journals. There is still scope for improvement to ensure better gender diversity across all roles and in all CRG's.