1944
DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3476(44)80077-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Clinical observations in the treatment of epidemic diarrhea of the newborn

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

1947
1947
1953
1953

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 26 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It is important to distinguish between the specific dysenteries, and non-specific enteritis: opinion is united in aclaiming the sulpha-drugs in the former group, but is at variance when discussing the latter. Anderson (1941) thought that sulphathiazole was of value, but his cases are few and the disea mild. Taylor (1941) agrees with him,as do Halpn and Cunningham (1942), but Cooper et aL (1941) found it useless in non-specific enteritis.…”
Section: Chemoterapymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is important to distinguish between the specific dysenteries, and non-specific enteritis: opinion is united in aclaiming the sulpha-drugs in the former group, but is at variance when discussing the latter. Anderson (1941) thought that sulphathiazole was of value, but his cases are few and the disea mild. Taylor (1941) agrees with him,as do Halpn and Cunningham (1942), but Cooper et aL (1941) found it useless in non-specific enteritis.…”
Section: Chemoterapymentioning
confidence: 99%