This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

To the Editor: The study by Dr Olds and colleagues¹ and the accompanying Editorial by Dr Earls² continue the series of reports trying to establish that home nurse visits change the course of events for deprived children. The premise of the study and the methods of the research raise significant issues.

First, a population of patients that cooperates with home nurse visits may select themselves out as a population likely to have better outcomes. Second, the study participants may want to prove that nurse home visits are good, raising questions about reporting bias for the study as a whole. Third, the end points of the outcomes being studied are soft, raising doubts about the benefits of nurse home visits.

A cohort cannot be properly studied in these circumstances when an agreement to cooperate with nurse home visits selects the study population, and the dropouts from the study invalidate the results . . . [Full Text of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLE

Long-term Effects of Nurse Home Visitation on Children's Criminal and Antisocial Behavior: 15-Year Follow-up of a Randomized Controlled Trial
David Olds, Charles R. Henderson, Jr, Robert Cole, John Eckenrode, Harriet Kitzman, Dennis Luckey, Lisa Pettitt, Kimberly Sidora, Pamela Morris, and Jane Powers
JAMA. 1998;280(14):1238-1244.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT