GERN+ARTICLE+annotation

1. Who is writing/speaking and what is their expertise? Where does the author/speaker work and what is their organizational position? What prepared the author/speaker to occupy this position?

There are 14 authors listed and they are spread out geographically all over the U.S.: Madison, Chapel Hill, Bethesda, Baltimore, St. Louis, Boston, NYC. Most are at Schools of Medicine. One at "Rho Federal Systems Division, and one from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. James E Gern is the only "corresponding author," what does this mean?

2. What topics and questions does the article/interview address? Does the author/speaker refer to related studies?

They address the topics of asthma as it relates to people of lower income living in urban settings. They raised questions, through analysis of the study performed, that dealt with 3 variables: the mother, the fetus, and the environment around them. The questions raised had to do with the relationships between these 3 variables at different stages of life. Did the mother have asthma? -if the child has asthma does that mean there could be a genetic link? These questions would then be compared to women who lived with the same environmental conditions but did not have a predisposition to asthma themselves. -if the child does have asthma, that may correlate the cause to more environmental reasons than genetic (in this instance).

The only instance when the author mentions another study is when the absence of other studies, thus far, was mentioned.

3. What methods and tools are used for the analysis?

The methods and tools used for analysis rely heavily on blood cultures and survey questions, both administered at predestined times.

4. What data is produced and used?

The data produced and used depends on the adherence of the patient to the criteria set fourth by the scientists performing the study. As seen, this study required a large pool of applicants to account for the illegible patients due to an assortment of reasons listed in the study.

5. What are the primary findings?

The findings seemed typical to what I would have thought the range and severity would be for low income residents of an urban environment. I did however find it interesting that for the study in many cases the newborns were accepted based on just the maternal medical history. Why not the father too? I also wondered if in a study where they are looking at the possibility of genetic linkage, why do they not go into detail of the relationship between mother and father. For instance, if a Black Mother and a Hispanic Father make a child, you are left with a Black Hispanic Son or Daughter, could the mixing of race somehow be a cure, if it was genetically linked.

6. What quotes usefully articulate the author/speaker’s key points and contributions?

"The URECA study is uniquely poised to add new information about how environmental exposures and lifestyles that are specific to children in low-income areas of the inner city affect immunological development and the risk of developing recurrent wheezing and ultimately asthma".

This quote sums up the study and the views I believe the scientists to have.

7. What are the implications of the findings?

The implications of the findings show that many children from low income inner cities are susceptible to asthma. I think there should be research done to upper class children who live in the city to contrast with another economic group for the urban environment, but I also think they should study the asthma rates of low income rural residents and upper class rural residents. I believe this additional data juxtaposed against each other would allow for a much clearer picture about asthma, I believe their study is too small to full understand asthma. I believe this data is one puzzle piece, but that's it.

8. What economic, political, cultural, or scientific trends or factors seem to have shaped the author/speaker’s orientation?


 * Her personal reasons for doing a study like this?**

9. What about the article/interview illustrates the expertise and bias the author/speaker brings to their work?

I believe exclusion of some data or questions is what makes the study biased. There should have been more questions asked (these questions may have been answered by other inclusions into the study itself).

10. How can the article/interview contribute to our research group’s shared questions?

I believe this article can help contribute to the groups shared questions because of the different worlds we all most likely grew up in. Most of us being from middle-upper class families lived much different than those of the study.