Despite advances in diagnosis, surgery, and antimicrobial therapy, mortality rates associated with complicated intra-abdominal infections remain exceedingly high. The World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) has designed the CIAOW study in order to describe the clinical, microbiological, and management-related profiles of both community- and healthcare-acquired complicated intra-abdominal infections in a worldwide context. The CIAOW study (Complicated Intra-Abdominal infection Observational Worldwide Study) is a multicenter observational study currently underway in 57 medical institutions worldwide. The study includes patients undergoing surgery or interventional drainage to address complicated intra-abdominal infections. This preliminary report includes all data from almost the first two months of the six-month study period. Patients who met inclusion criteria with either community-acquired or healthcare-associated complicated intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) were included in the study. 702 patients with a mean age of 49.2 years (range 18–98) were enrolled in the study. 272 patients (38.7%) were women and 430 (62.3%) were men. Among these patients, 615 (87.6%) were affected by community-acquired IAIs while the remaining 87 (12.4%) suffered from healthcare-associated infections. Generalized peritonitis was observed in 304 patients (43.3%), whereas localized peritonitis or abscesses was registered in 398 (57.7%) patients.The overall mortality rate was 10.1% (71/702). The final results of the CIAOW Study will be published following the conclusion of the study period in March 2013.

No abstract

BackgroundEpilepsy is a common neurological disorder in childhood. However, there have been limited studies on its impact on the oral health of affected children. Our study aimed to assess the oral health of children with epilepsy in the city of Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, as perceived by their mothers.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study in three hospitals. We included children 2–18 years old with physician-confirmed epilepsy diagnosis. We assessed parental perception of dental status and need for dental care using a standardized questionnaire that was completed by the mothers. To adjust for potential confounding variables, we used univariate and multivariate logistic regression.ResultsWe included 96 children with epilepsy in our study. Their mean age was 6.4±3.4 years. In 55.2% (n=53), dental status was rated as bad, and in 84.4% (n=81) a need for dental care was expressed. Cerebral palsy (OR 5.06, 95% CI 1.28–19.99; P=0.021), motor disability (OR 6.41, 95% CI 1.12–36.73; P=0.037), referral from a pediatric neurology clinic to a dentist (OR 10.755, 95% CI 3.290–35.151; P<0.001), and irregular brushing of teeth (OR 5.397, 95% CI 1.536–18.961; P=0.009) were significantly associated with increased risk of perceived bad dental status. Perception of the child as being overweight (OR 0.117, 95% CI 0.034–0.400; P=0.001) was significantly associated with decreased risk of perceived bad dental status. Motor disability (OR 5.73, 95% CI 1.64–20.04; P=0.006) was significantly associated with increased parental expression of need for dental care.ConclusionIn most children with epilepsy, perceived dental status was bad and there was a high expressed need for dental care. Interventions to improve the dental health of children with epilepsy should focus on those with cerebral palsy and motor disability.

Opinion Question Answering (Opinion QA) is the task of enabling users to explore others opinions toward a particular service of product in order to make decisions. Arabic Opinion QA is more challenging due to its complex morphology compared to other languages and has many varieties dialects. On the other hand, there are insignificant research efforts and resources available that focus on Opinion QA in Arabic. This study aims to address the difficulties of Arabic opinion QA by proposing a hybrid method of lexicon-based approach and classification using Naïve Bayes classifier. The proposed method contains pre-processing phases such as, transformation, normalization and tokenization and exploiting auxiliary information (thesaurus). The lexiconbased approach is executed by replacing some words with its synonyms using the domain dictionary. The classification task is performed by Naïve Bayes classifier to classify the opinions based on the positive or negative sentiment polarity. The proposed method has been evaluated using the common information retrieval metrics i.e., Precision, Recall and F-measure. For comparison, three classifiers have been applied which are Naïve Bayes (NB), Support Vector Machine (SVM) and K-Nearest Neighbor (KNN). The experimental results have demonstrated that NB outperforms SVM and KNN by achieving 91% accuracy.

BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis on the construct and criterion validity of multi-source feedback (MSF) to assess physicians and surgeons in practice.MethodsIn this study, we followed the guidelines for the reporting of observational studies included in a meta-analysis. In addition to PubMed and MEDLINE databases, the CINAHL, EMBASE, and PsycINFO databases were searched from January 1975 to November 2012. All articles listed in the references of the MSF studies were reviewed to ensure that all relevant publications were identified. All 35 articles were independently coded by two authors (AA, TD), and any discrepancies (eg, effect size calculations) were reviewed by the other authors (KA, AD, CV).ResultsPhysician/surgeon performance measures from 35 studies were identified. A random-effects model of weighted mean effect size differences (d) resulted in: construct validity coefficients for the MSF system on physician/surgeon performance across different levels in practice ranged from d=0.14 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.40–0.69) to d=1.78 (95% CI 1.20–2.30); construct validity coefficients for the MSF on physician/surgeon performance on two different occasions ranged from d=0.23 (95% CI 0.13–0.33) to d=0.90 (95% CI 0.74–1.10); concurrent validity coefficients for the MSF based on differences in assessor group ratings ranged from d=0.50 (95% CI 0.47–0.52) to d=0.57 (95% CI 0.55–0.60); and predictive validity coefficients for the MSF on physician/surgeon performance across different standardized measures ranged from d=1.28 (95% CI 1.16–1.41) to d=1.43 (95% CI 0.87–2.00).ConclusionThe construct and criterion validity of the MSF system is supported by small to large effect size differences based on the MSF process and physician/surgeon performance across different clinical and nonclinical domain measures.