iron81
06-25-2007, 01:29 PM
Chicago Tribune (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-mrsa25jun25,1,1355761.story?coll=chi-news-hed)
I read a story today on the front page of the paper talking about how 48,000 people are dying from drug-resistant Staph infections in hospitals each year. Here's how the story came to that conclusion. It doesn't look like the actual study has been released yet on the group website (http://www.apic.org//AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home):
- They sent out a survey asking hospitals how many staph infections they had on a particular day and extrapolated that to the number of infections. So far, so good, even though this number is 10 times the previous (CDC) estimate of Staph infections.
- They point out that the previous estimate counts about 5,000 deaths/year from Staph infections.
- They then use this to say ZOMG! 48,000 Staph deaths/year.
The reason this is horrible is because a staph infection that leads to death is much more likely to be detected. The much larger number of Staph infections is due to hidden illnesses that are undetected, but obviously there won't be many undetected illnesses that lead to death. It might be a mistake by the reporter, but it sounds like they are quoting the study. It just puts me on tilt when non-peer reviewed studies make the front page with methodolgy so horrible I can pick it apart from the article.
I read a story today on the front page of the paper talking about how 48,000 people are dying from drug-resistant Staph infections in hospitals each year. Here's how the story came to that conclusion. It doesn't look like the actual study has been released yet on the group website (http://www.apic.org//AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home):
- They sent out a survey asking hospitals how many staph infections they had on a particular day and extrapolated that to the number of infections. So far, so good, even though this number is 10 times the previous (CDC) estimate of Staph infections.
- They point out that the previous estimate counts about 5,000 deaths/year from Staph infections.
- They then use this to say ZOMG! 48,000 Staph deaths/year.
The reason this is horrible is because a staph infection that leads to death is much more likely to be detected. The much larger number of Staph infections is due to hidden illnesses that are undetected, but obviously there won't be many undetected illnesses that lead to death. It might be a mistake by the reporter, but it sounds like they are quoting the study. It just puts me on tilt when non-peer reviewed studies make the front page with methodolgy so horrible I can pick it apart from the article.