Frequency of the Congenital Transmission of Trypanosoma cruzi: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND: Chagas disease is caused by the parasite Trypanosoma cruzi and is endemic in much of Latin America. With increased globalisation and immigration, it is a risk in any country, partly through congenital transmission. The frequency of congenital transmission is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To assess the frequency of congenital transmission of T. cruzi. SEARCH STRATEGY: PubMed, Journals@Ovid Full Text, EMBASE, CINAHL, Fuente Academica and BIREME databases were searched using seven search terms related to Chagas disease or T. cruzi and congenital transmission. SELECTION CRITERIA: The inclusion criteria were the following: Dutch, English, French, Portuguese or Spanish language; case report, case series or observational study; original data on congenital T. cruzi infection in humans; congenital infection rate reported or it could be derived. This systematic review included 13 case reports/series and 51 observational studies. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two investigators independently collected data on study characteristics, diagnosis and congenital infection rate. The principal summary measure - the congenital transmission rate - is defined as the number of congenitally infected infants divided by the number of infants born to infected mothers. A random effects model was used. MAIN RESULTS: The pooled congenital transmission rate was 4.7% (95% confidence interval: 3.9-5.6%). Countries where T. cruzi is endemic had a higher rate of congenital transmission compared with countries where it is not endemic (5.0% versus 2.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Congenital transmission of Chagas disease is a global problem. Overall risk of congenital infection in infants born to infected mothers is about 5%. The congenital mode of transmission requires targeted screening to prevent future cases of Chagas disease.Fil: Howard, Elizabeth J.. University of Tulane; Estados UnidosFil: Xiong, Xu. University of Tulane; Estados UnidosFil: Carlier, Yves. Université Libre de Bruxelles; BélgicaFil: Sosa-estani, Sergio Alejandro. Dirección Nacional de Instituto de Investigación. Administración Nacional de Laboratorio e Instituto de Salud. Instituto Nacional de Parasitología; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Buekens, Pierre. University of Tulane; Estados Unido

Cigarettes, dollars and bitcoins – an essay on the ontology of money

What does being money consist in? We argue that something is money if, and only if, it is typically acquired in order to realise the reduction in transaction costs that accrues in virtue of agents coordinating on acquiring the same thing when deciding what thing to acquire in order to exchange. What kinds of things can be money? We argue against the common view that a variety of things (notes, coins, gold, cigarettes, etc.) can be money. All monetary systems are best interpreted as implementing the same basic protocol. Money, i.e. the thing that we coordinate on acquiring in order to lower our transaction costs, is, in all cases, a set of positions on an abstract mathematical object, namely a relative ratio scale. The things that we ordinarily call ‘money’ are merely records of positions on such a scale

What is money? An alternative to Searle's institutional facts

In The Construction of Social Reality, John Searle develops a theory of institutional facts and objects, of which money, borders and property are presented as prime examples. These objects are the result of us collectively intending certain natural objects to have a certain status, i.e. to ‘count as’ being certain social objects. This view renders such objects irreducible to natural objects. In this paper we propose a radically different approach that is more compatible with standard economic theory. We claim that such institutional objects can be fully understood in terms of actions and incentives, and hence the Searlean apparatus solves a non-existent problem

COVID-19 and pregnancy: An umbrella review of clinical presentation, vertical transmission, and maternal and perinatal outcomes

Background We conducted an overview of systematic reviews (SRs) summarizing the best evidence regarding the effect of COVID-19 on maternal and child health following Cochrane methods and PRISMA statement for reporting (PROSPERO-CRD42020208783). Methods We searched literature databases and COVID-19 research websites from January to October 2020. We selected relevant SRs reporting adequate search strategy, data synthesis, risk of bias assessment, and/or individual description of included studies describing COVID-19 and pregnancy outcomes. Pair of reviewers independently selected studies through COVIDENCE web-software, performed the data extraction, and assessed its quality through the AMSTAR-2 tool. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus. Each SR’s results were synthesized and for the most recent, relevant, comprehensive, and with the highest quality, by predefined criteria, we presented GRADE evidence tables. Results We included 66 SRs of observational studies out of 608 references retrieved and most (61/66) had "critically low" overall quality. We found a relatively low degree of primary study overlap across SRs. The most frequent COVID-19 clinical findings during pregnancy were fever (28–100%), mild respiratory symptoms (20–79%), raised C-reactive protein (28–96%), lymphopenia (34–80%), and pneumonia signs in diagnostic imaging (7–99%). The most frequent maternal outcomes were C-section (23–96%) and preterm delivery (14–64%). Most of their babies were asymptomatic (16–93%) or presented fever (0–50%), low birth weight (5–43%) or preterm delivery (2–69%). The odds ratio (OR) of receiving invasive ventilation for COVID-19 versus non-COVID-19 pregnant women was 1.88 (95% Confidence Interval [CI] 1.36–2.60) and the OR that their babies were admitted to neonatal intensive care unit was 3.13 (95%CI 2.05–4.78). The risk of congenital transmission or via breast milk was estimated to be low, but close contacts may carry risks. Conclusion This comprehensive overview supports that pregnant women with COVID-19 may be at increased risk of adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes and low risk of congenital transmission.Fil: Ciapponi, Agustín. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública; Argentina. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; ArgentinaFil: Bardach, Ariel Esteban. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública; ArgentinaFil: Comandé, Daniel. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; ArgentinaFil: Berrueta, Mabel. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; ArgentinaFil: Argento, Fernando J.. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; ArgentinaFil: Rodriguez Cairoli, Federico. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; ArgentinaFil: Zamora, Natalia. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; ArgentinaFil: Santa María, Victoria. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; ArgentinaFil: Xiong, Xu. University of Tulane; Estados UnidosFil: Zaraa, Sabra. University of Washington; Estados UnidosFil: Mazzoni, Agustina. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; ArgentinaFil: Buekens, Pierre. University of Tulane; Estados Unido

Psychosocial Factors and Preterm Birth Among African American and White Women in Central North Carolina

Objectives. We assessed associations between psychosocial factors and preterm birth, stratified by race in a prospective cohort study

Newborn-Care Training and Perinatal Mortality in Developing Countries

Background: Of the 3.7 million neonatal deaths and 3.3 million stillbirths each year, 98% occur in developing countries. An evaluation of community-based interventions designed to reduce the number of these deaths is needed. Methods: With the use of a train-the-trainer model, local instructors trained birth attendants from rural communities in six countries (Argentina, Democratic Republic of Congo, Guatemala, India, Pakistan, and Zambia) in the World Health Organization Essential Newborn Care course (which focuses on routine neonatal care, resuscitation, thermoregulation, breast-feeding, kangaroo [skin-to-skin] care, care of the small baby, and common illnesses) and ( except in Argentina) in a modified version of the American Academy of Pediatrics Neonatal Resuscitation Program (which teaches basic resuscitation in depth). The Essential Newborn Care intervention was assessed among 57,643 infants with the use of a before-and-after design. The Neonatal Resuscitation Program intervention was assessed as a cluster-randomized, controlled trial involving 62,366 infants. The primary outcome was neonatal death in the first 7 days after birth. Results: The 7-day follow-up rate was 99.2%. After birth attendants were trained in the Essential Newborn Care course, there was no significant reduction from baseline in the rate of neonatal death from all causes in the 7 days after birth ( relative risk with training, 0.99, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81 to 1.22) or in the rate of perinatal death, there was a significant reduction in the rate of stillbirth ( relative risk with training, 0.69, 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.88, P = 0.003). In clusters of births in which attendants had been randomly assigned to receive training in the Neonatal Resuscitation Program, as compared with control clusters, there was no reduction in the rates of neonatal death in the 7 days after birth, stillbirth, or perinatal death. Conclusions: The rate of neonatal death in the 7 days after birth did not decrease after the introduction of Essential Newborn Care training of community-based birth attendants, although the rate of stillbirths was reduced. Subsequent training in the Neonatal Resuscitation Program did not significantly reduce the mortality rates