Перегляд вихідного коду сторінки Aggravating Misconception Of CYTH4 Unwrapped

The conditions of RV infection provide the opportunity for this to happen: the disease is very contagious, preferentially affects very young children who need care by an adult, and occurs mainly  during a short epidemic season every year at the same time. These conditions allow the comparison of work absenteeism during epidemic and non-epidemic periods. It reinforces the circumstantial evidence showing a link between the observed reduction in absenteeism and the introduction of the vaccine, but we cannot claim or prove a clear causality from the data here. There are potentially other methods for collecting the same data prospectively, but it would be difficult to attain the same [http://www.selleckchem.com/products/CAL-101.html GS1101] quality in the final results.16 This is not a clinical trial but an analysis of an administrative database, in which the prospect of collecting that type of information in such a rigorous way is not obvious. It should also be clear that the overall benefit of the vaccine on a reduction in absenteeism in the workplace could be greater than measured here in a very specific subgroup of working mothers (those with a first child). It is likely that we could observe the same benefit among working mothers with a second or third child who was never previously exposed to RV. Finally, will the findings in this  particular environment be easily transposable to other settings? Given the many conditions necessary to observe and measure the effect of a vaccine, it is likely that in other settings different amounts of benefit will be seen. For example, the facilities needed for an adult to be easily absent from work for childhood illness must be present before similar results could be observed.  Conclusions Working mothers with a first child benefit from RV vaccination through a reduction in work absenteeism. The modelled estimates and the observed data fit well for absences from work during the year following birth. The higher observed gain (0.88-day vs a 0.72-day gain) could be explained by a herd effect of the vaccine. There is possibly an underestimate of the total gain as only a select group (mothers with a first child) was investigated. In the case of the City of Antwerp, the benefit can be expressed as a cost gain per woman as a cost�Cbenefit ratio of 1.85 (working days gained/vaccine cost). Confirmation of these results with data sets from other public organisations in Belgium is expected in the near future. Acknowledgments The authors wish to thank Carla Lefebvre (independent research and writing consultant) and Carole Nadin (Fleetwith Ltd) for assistance in editing this paper; Gregory Collet for his editorial support (Business & Decision Life Sciences on behalf of GSK Vaccines); and the City of Antwerp for making the data set of administrative personnel available for analysis. Footnotes Contributors: BS developed the protocol, prepared the analysis, and the report and wrote the first draft of the manuscript.