Pediatrics In Review Research Articles

Readers' Views

Readers' Views

How to Use PIR for Renewal of Certification

During 1995, many pediatricians will participate for the first time in the Pediatric Renewal of Certification Program (PRCP). Since Pediatrics in Review (PIR) and the Pediatrics Review and Education Program (PREP) began in 1979, their material has been integrated with the American Board of Pediatrics (ABP) renewal of certification program. The ABP sets the educational objectives (now called content specifications) and develops the examinations. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) develops PREP education materials, PIR, and the Self-Assessment Exercise based on these. Each year PIR covers about 1000 of the more than 4000 content specifications, including at least half of the 900 selected as the basis each year for the cognitive examination.

How to Use PIR for Renewal of Certification

During 1995, many pediatricians will participate for the first time in the Pediatric Renewal of Certification Program (PRCP). Since Pediatrics in Review (PIR) and the Pediatrics Review and Education Program (PREP) began in 1979, their material has been integrated with the American Board of Pediatrics (ABP) renewal of certification program. The ABP sets the educational objectives (now called content specifications) and develops the examinations. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) develops PREP education materials, PIR, and the Self-Assessment Exercise based on these.Each year PIR covers about 1000 of the more than 4000 content specifications, including at least half of the 900 selected as the basis each year for the cognitive examination.

Guess Who's Going to Medical School!

Both Pediatrics in Review (PIR) and CompuPREP are rich resources that can be incorporated into the clinical curricula designed for medical students. Although both are geared to meet the needs of the practicing pediatrician, in our experience they have served as excellent adjuncts to self-study syllabi, lecture presentations, and small group discussions for students, as well. Creative Use of PIR At the University of Massachusetts, the review articles and their associated quizzes, the section entitled "Index of Suspicion," and the Guides for Record Review all have been used for a variety of instructional purposes. The review articles are especially adaptable to seminars using a problem-based or clinical problem-solving model.

Guess Who's Going to Medical School!

Both Pediatrics in Review (PIR) and CompuPREP are rich resources that can be incorporated into the clinical curricula designed for medical students. Although both are geared to meet the needs of the practicing pediatrician, in our experience they have served as excellent adjuncts to self-study syllabi, lecture presentations, and small group discussions for students, as well.Creative Use of PIRAt the University of Massachusetts, the review articles and their associated quizzes, the section entitled

Editor's Page

Editor’s Page| November 01 1985 Editor's Page Pediatr Rev (1985) 7 (5): 158. https://doi.org/10.1542/pir.7-5-158 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Editor's Page. Pediatr Rev November 1985; 7 (5): 158. https://doi.org/10.1542/pir.7-5-158 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All PublicationsAll JournalsPediatrics In ReviewPediatricsHospital PediatricsNeoReviewsAAP Grand RoundsAAP NewsAll AAP Sites Search Advanced Search For those of our readers who are interested in or who notice such things, the editorship of PEDIATRICS IN REVIEW (PIR) formally reverts with this issue to Dr Robert J. Haggerty, who has been on leave from the job since October 1983, in order to serve as Vice-President and then President of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP). Actually, Bob was totally responsible for the 1983-1984 year of PIR and recruited about half the articles for the 1984-1985 year, while I have been responsible for the editing of the same volume, will be totally responsible for the 1986-1986 year, and will be responsible for about half the recruiting for the 1986-1987 year. This content is only available via PDF. Copyright © 1985 by the American Academy of Pediatrics1985 You do not currently have access to this content.

Patient Education in Asthma Management

Three times each publication year, Ross Laboratories assists one of our authors in the preparation of adjunctive educational material, for distribution to pediatricians. These have ranged from the audiotape of normal heart murmurs, prepared by Dr Liebman, to patient and parent education posters, suitable for the office, relating to problems of the developing foot and the use of appropriate shoes. Several educational objectives this year, as in all previous years, deal with the appropriate diagnosis and management of children with asthma—the most common chronic physical disease of childhood. Dr John Anderson has prepared a patient and parent education booklet, which will be distributed to pediatricians by Ross Laboratories following the publication of this issue of PEDIATRICS IN REVIEW.

Patient Education in Asthma Management

Three times each publication year, Ross Laboratories assists one of our authors in the preparation of adjunctive educational material, for distribution to pediatricians. These have ranged from the audiotape of normal heart murmurs, prepared by Dr Liebman, to patient and parent education posters, suitable for the office, relating to problems of the developing foot and the use of appropriate shoes. Several educational objectives this year, as in all previous years, deal with the appropriate diagnosis and management of children with asthma—the most common chronic physical disease of childhood. Dr John Anderson has prepared a patient and parent education booklet, which will be distributed to pediatricians by Ross Laboratories following the publication of this issue of PEDIATRICS IN REVIEW.

Editorial: Genetics-Neonatology-Cardiology

The topics selected for education for the 81/82 PREP year are Genetics, Neonatology, and Cardiology. Each area presents a special challenge. Each is a field in which enormous advances in knowledge have occurred in the past decade. Each represents the use of very high level technology—knowledge and technology most of us as general pediatricians do not have. Most of the technology is hospital based; expert teams working daily with the complex issues are best able to provide accuracy and efficiency. The main question I have faced as I planned this year of PEDIATRICS IN REVIEW has been what should the generalist know about G-N-C?

Editorial: Feedback

During the 1980/81 year the self-assessment examinations at the end of each issue of PEDIATRICS IN REVIEW were dropped in response to the large number of criticisms of the questions. In their place the computer cards required readers to check whether the articles were relevant and accurate. In addition, we asked readers to add comments on the back of cards. The feedback has been very useful. Dropping the self-assessment examinations has been overwhelmingly condemned. Many wrote that, while they had written protesting the quizzes last year, they now had changed their minds and wanted them back. The Chapter Chairmen, overwhelmingly, voted to have them reinstated.

Water Bugs in Mist Tents

L. J. Janchar of Marion, Ohio, wrote: "In PEDIATRICS IN REVIEW, July 1980 (p 29), in regard to the article `Mist Tent for Cystic Fibrosis' you state that " mist therapy increases the risk of `water-bug' infection (Pseudomonas, Serratia, etc)..."I have often heard this comment but I have seen no literature in regard to evidence supporting this statement. Could you please furnish me with references in regard to the risk of infection secondary to mist therapy?" Dr Rapkin (author of the abstract) replied: "In July 1967, Dr Hugh Moffet and colleagues in a series of three articles described the association of infection and inhalation therapy. The titles of the articles are revealing: "Bacteria recovered from distilled water and inhalation therapy equipment"; `Survival and dissemination of bacteria in nebulizers and incubators'; `Colonization of infants exposed to bacterially contaminated mists' (Am J Dis Child 114:7, 13, 21, 1967). Previously Hoffman and Finberg (J Pediatr 46:626, 1955) had made the association between water and infection. Much subsequent data have been accumulated and the bibliography is long and detailed. The conclusions have been the same as Moffet's: mist therapy and use of inhalationtherapy apparatus poses an additional risk which must be carefully weighed against the benefit of the therapy to the patient.

Editorial: An Exciting Future for PREP

Pediatric Review and Education Program (PREP) is an authentic education process; its strength is a result of practitioners working in harmony with academicians and their paramount concern being educational issues important for child health.Recently, the American Academy of Pediatrics has been pleased to announce a most handsome educational grant from Ross Laboratories which essentially underwrites the current direct costs for production and printing of PEDIATRICS IN REVIEW. The purpose of this grant includes the following singular points:1. The financial support enables the Academy to maintain a quality educational instrument—under the guidance of the editor, associate editors, editorial board, and authors—which provides ongoing educational commentary about recent advances in pediatrics and topics for annual review.

Editorial: Those Educational Objectives

The material Covered in PEDIATRICS IN REVIEW is, for the most part, based upon Educational Objectives developed by two Task Forces and accepted by the Coordinating Committee on Continuing Education and Recertification. Both Task Forces are made up of practicing pediatricians (at least 50%) and academicians, and are appointed by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Board of Pediatrics. The organization and respective responsibilities of the Task Forces are shown in the diagram. The activities of The Academy (PREP) and The Board are based upon these objectives. The Topics Task Force develops some 25 to 35 Educational Objectives dealing with the Topics selected for review each year.

Pyuria: A Useful Finding or Not?

One of our readers asks: "This may seem like a request from the dark ages, but in reading the article on urinary tract infection on page 133 in the November issue of PEDIATRICS IN REVIEW I did not notice any reference to pyuria as an indicator of urinary tract infection in a symptomatic child. Our usual method of diagnosing urinary tract infection in a child who has a suspected urinary tract infection is to examine the urine for pyuria. I would appreciate an abstract on a review article or just a reference which gives hard data that this is not good practice.

Editorial: The First Birthday

With this issue of PEDIATRICS IN REVIEW we start our second year of publication. In the spirit of the second year theme of PREP, "Child Development," I feel that during this first year we have developed a considerable amount of trust and support from our readers' acceptance of the journal and, at times, from their stern guidance; we have also learned some things that should improve the Journal during the second year. EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES I had originally hoped to address, in the course of a year, the majority of the educational objectives developed by the two task forces, but the task force on Recent Advances produces some 150 objectives per year and the one on Topics produces 35.

Editorial: The First Birthday

Editorial| July 01 1980 Editorial: The First Birthday R. J. H. R. J. H. Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Pediatr Rev (1980) 2 (1): 3. https://doi.org/10.1542/pir.2-1-3 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation R. J. H.; Editorial: The First Birthday. Pediatr Rev July 1980; 2 (1): 3. https://doi.org/10.1542/pir.2-1-3 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All PublicationsAll JournalsPediatrics In ReviewPediatricsHospital PediatricsNeoReviewsAAP Grand RoundsAAP NewsAll AAP Sites Search Advanced Search With this issue of PEDIATRICS IN REVIEW we start our second year of publication. In the spirit of the second year theme of PREP, "Child Development," I feel that during this first year we have developed a considerable amount of trust and support from our readers' acceptance of the journal and, at times, from their stern guidance; we have also learned some things that should improve the Journal during the second year.EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVESI had originally hoped to address, in the course of a year, the majority of the educational objectives developed by the two task forces, but the task force on Recent Advances produces some 150 objectives per year and the one on Topics produces 35. Topics: advisory committees, child development, knowledge acquisition, objective (goal) This content is only available via PDF. Copyright © 1980 by the American Academy of Pediatrics1980 You do not currently have access to this content.

Editorial One Year's Experience

This is the last issue of the 1979-1980 PEDIATRICS IN REVIEW. The reason we schedule only ten issues per year (July through April) is to allow two full months from receipt of the April issue until the June Self-Administered Graded Examination (SAGE), or the recertification examination. What have we learned in this first year? By and large the comments have been very positive. Most readers like the mixture of review articles and abstracts. Some want only new material, some only "cold dope," and others controversies. I believe that by providing a mixture in each issue we can meet more of these individual preferences.

Editorial: Letters to the Editor

I have received many, many letters from readers of PEDIATRICS IN REVIEW. To publish most, or even some of them, would take precious space from the cognitive material in PIR. I have decided not to publish a Letters to the Editor section, but to handle the letters in the following ways. They fall into three quite distinct categories and I believe that each should be dealt with in a different way. The first group, and by far the majority so far, is very complimentary. While I would always like to publish laudatory comments in the Journal, I cannot justify the space for adulation. I will keep them for my ego file.

Controversies in Pediatrics: What Tests Are Indicated for the Child Under 2 with Fever

Most articles in PEDIATRICS IN REVIEW are presented in a didactic manner, sometimes more so than the authors would like. But other topics are still so controversial that to present only one side or one view would do disservice to authors and readers. From time-to-time we will present such controversies in pediatrics in this section. Such an instance is "fever in young children." Since the studies a few years ago that demonstrated bacteremia in more of these children than most of us previously suspected, all of us are more anxious than before about such children. Can we trust our clinical judgment as to who requires blood cultures and antimicrobial therapy? What tests are useful in making this difficult decision? McCarthy has done a series of studies over the years which he summaries below. But the experts do not always agree. Smith has added his view of the problem. Unfortunately, some things in medicine are still not so clear. But the reader will know that experts share his uncertainties. R.J.H One of the common reasons that a child visits the pediatrician is for the evaluation of a febrile illness. In our emergency room, 20% of children evaluated have a fever. Therefore, a well thought out approach to the febrile child is essential in pediatric practice.

Controversies in Pediatrics: What Tests Are Indicated for the Child Under 2 with Fever

Most articles in PEDIATRICS IN REVIEW are presented in a didactic manner, sometimes more so than the authors would like. But other topics are still so controversial that to present only one side or one view would do disservice to authors and readers. From time-to-time we will present such controversies in pediatrics in this section. Such an instance is fever in young Since the studies a few years ago that demonstrated bacteremia in more of these children than most of us previously suspected, all of us are more anxious than before about such children. Can we trust our clinical judgment as to who requires blood cultures and antimicrobial therapy? What tests are useful in making this difficult decision? McCarthy has done a series of studies over the years which he summaries below. But the experts do not always agree. Smith has added his view of the problem. Unfortunately, some things in medicine are still not so clear. But the reader will know that experts share his uncertainties. R.J.H One of the common reasons that a child visits the pediatrician is for the evaluation of a febrile illness. In our emergency room, 20% of children evaluated have a fever. Therefore, a well thought out approach to the febrile child is essential in pediatric practice.