Saint Louis, Catherine. "After a Stillbirth, Tests Can Help Pinpoint the Cause." The New York Times 9 Mar. 2017: Print.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/09/well/family/after-a-stillbirth-tests-can-help-pinpoint-the-cause.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fscience&action=click&contentCollection=science®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=2&pgtype=sectionfront
The article “After a Stillbirth, Tests Can Help Pinpoint the Cause” by Catherine Saint Louis describes a recently published study which found that an examination of the placenta helped find the cause of the stillbirth in two-thirds of cases, a fetal autopsy helped 40 percent of the time, and genetic testing found a cause in 12 percent of cases. Researchers conducting the study analyzed 512 stillbirths from 2006 to 2008 from 59 hospitals in five different states. Saint Louis includes information related to the causes of the stillbirths that have been found by a large group of researchers focused on this issue. Complications during the birth process account for 30 percent of stillbirths, placental problems before labor make up 25 percent of the cases, genetic conditions/ birth defects are responsible for 14 percent, infection for 13 percent, and umbilical cord issues for 10 percent of cases. The author explains that the placental testing shortly after birth is important because knowing why the stillbirth occurred can help the parents during future pregnancies.
Saint Louis’s piece is extremely important to society because it deals with the devastating issue of stillbirth. Her article shows that certain testing on the placenta or on the infant can provide the parents and the doctors with answers to the question of why the tragedy occurred. These tests can help doctors and scientists as they strive to find solutions and cures for stillbirths, and it can help the family of the infant as they struggle to understand why the baby died. In some cases, these tests can help guide a patient’s care in future pregnancies if their is a specific problem with the genetics or the immune system of the mother.
The author did an amazing job of approaching this sensitive topic by introducing the scientific information gently and by weaving in anecdotal information. She includes the testimony of one mother as she describes her grief and confusion after she lost her baby, which has an emotional effect on the reader. The author also did a great job of including examples of certain conditions that can be treated accordingly during the next pregnancy if the cause of the stillbirth is pinpointed. While the article is well-written and informative, the author could have included information related to the procedure and background of the study. She discussed the results and the implications of the study at length, so her article could have been more well-rounded if she included these details. I also wish that she had written about what the researchers plan on doing with the results and if there are any studies or experiments that plan to use these results to find a solution to stillbirths.
The article “After a Stillbirth, Tests Can Help Pinpoint the Cause” by Catherine Saint Louis describes a recently published study which found that an examination of the placenta helped find the cause of the stillbirth in two-thirds of cases, a fetal autopsy helped 40 percent of the time, and genetic testing found a cause in 12 percent of cases. Researchers conducting the study analyzed 512 stillbirths from 2006 to 2008 from 59 hospitals in five different states. Saint Louis includes information related to the causes of the stillbirths that have been found by a large group of researchers focused on this issue. Complications during the birth process account for 30 percent of stillbirths, placental problems before labor make up 25 percent of the cases, genetic conditions/ birth defects are responsible for 14 percent, infection for 13 percent, and umbilical cord issues for 10 percent of cases. The author explains that the placental testing shortly after birth is important because knowing why the stillbirth occurred can help the parents during future pregnancies.
Saint Louis’s piece is extremely important to society because it deals with the devastating issue of stillbirth. Her article shows that certain testing on the placenta or on the infant can provide the parents and the doctors with answers to the question of why the tragedy occurred. These tests can help doctors and scientists as they strive to find solutions and cures for stillbirths, and it can help the family of the infant as they struggle to understand why the baby died. In some cases, these tests can help guide a patient’s care in future pregnancies if their is a specific problem with the genetics or the immune system of the mother.
The author did an amazing job of approaching this sensitive topic by introducing the scientific information gently and by weaving in anecdotal information. She includes the testimony of one mother as she describes her grief and confusion after she lost her baby, which has an emotional effect on the reader. The author also did a great job of including examples of certain conditions that can be treated accordingly during the next pregnancy if the cause of the stillbirth is pinpointed. While the article is well-written and informative, the author could have included information related to the procedure and background of the study. She discussed the results and the implications of the study at length, so her article could have been more well-rounded if she included these details. I also wish that she had written about what the researchers plan on doing with the results and if there are any studies or experiments that plan to use these results to find a solution to stillbirths.
Eva's did a great job with her review of the article "After a Stillbirth, Tests Can Help Pinpoint the Cause." I loved how she included many facts and data to explain the issue and give the reader accurate information. I also liked how she connected the issue of stillbirth to society and explained how knowing why a stillbirth occurred can prevent it in future pregnancies. Finally, I thought that her opinion of the article was well articulated and she really delved in to the strengths and weaknesses of the article, which gave more credibility to her review.
ReplyDeleteAlthough Eva did a great job, there are a few things she could work on. I would have liked for her to include a quote from the article to add to the reader's understanding and give and expert opinion. I also wished that she had explained the process of analyzing the placenta more, such as giving details that indicate to doctors what went wrong in the pregnancy.
Eva's review kept me updated on a topic that I was already interested and gave me some food for thought on technological improvements in the field. I'm very happy to hear that more is being done to combat such a devastating and prevalent issue.
Eva’s review of the article "After a Stillbirth, Tests Can Help Pinpoint the Cause" was particularly well written. Her incorporation of data and statistics gave the reader a greater sense of the issue and important information highlighting some of the complexities of the issue. Furthermore, her connection of the issue to society was relevant and engaged the reader in the subject. Third, her summary was concise and to the point.
ReplyDeleteAlthough her review was very well written, there were a few aspects Eva could have improved. First, the inclusion of a quote would have given a greater sense of the article’s tone. Second, there were some areas of the review where Eva could have gone more into depth, for instance in detailing the signs that would indicate an upcoming stillbirth.
The article and review were quite compelling. Clearly, this is a major issue and is deserving of significant attention. I was not particularly well informed on the issue prior to reading the review, but gained considerable insight upon reading it.
Saint Louis, Catherine. "After a Stillbirth, Tests Can Help Pinpoint the Cause." The New York Times 9 Mar. 2017: Print. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/09/well/family/after-a-stillbirth-tests-can-help-pinpoint-the-cause.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fscience&action=click&contentCollection=science®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=2&pgtype=sectionfront
ReplyDeleteEva’s review of After a Stillbirth, Tests Can Help Pinpoint the Cause was a very interesting review. I liked how she was really thorough and gave details on why stillbirths could occur, citing various examples. This helped me understand just how many causes there can be and strengthened her review as it helps the readers have a deep understanding of what she is talking about. In addition, the fact that she had many statistics from the article incorporated into her review, aided me in understanding this topic better and gave me some additional, interesting information about it. Finally, the last thing that I thought Eva did very well was giving us a detailed explanation of why this topic is important to the society but also to the parents going through these situations.
Although this review was extremely interesting, one way it could have been made better is that Eva could have stated which scientists were involved in this study. This would have made the review more thorough, so by just adding the names of the scientists she could have avoided this problem. Moreover, I would have liked for her to talk more about what kind of tests are available, as she just stated it at the end and did not go into much details about it. By adding one or two more sentences about this topic she could have added even more details about stillbirths.
Overall, this review was captivating and taught me about a topic that I was not familiar with. I had a vague knowledge about stillbirths but had never read any articles on it so by reading Eva’s review I learned new things and broadened my own knowledge about the dangers of some pregnancies. Furthermore, this review showed me just how important these tests are in helping not only society but also the parents of the stillbirth babies.
Connor Barrett
ReplyDelete3/19/17
AP Bio
Saint Louis, Catherine. "After a Stillbirth, Tests Can Help Pinpoint the Cause." The New York Times 9 Mar. 2017: Print.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/09/well/family/after-a-stillbirth-tests-can-help-pinpoint-the-cause.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fscience&action=click&contentCollection=science®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=2&pgtype=sectionfront
I decided to read Eva’s review of “After a Stillbirth, Tests Can Help Pinpoint the Cause” because the title sounded interesting. Eva did a good job explaining the concept of the article and the facts and opinions it expressed. I also appreciated Eva’s own commentary on the subject in her second paragraph. Eva’s suggestions for improvement to the author were also well thought out.
If I were to make suggestions to Eva I would tell Eva to elaborate on her own opinions because that paragraph was the most interesting. In addition it would have been nice to hear a little more about what type of tests are available.
I chose this review because the title sounded very interesting. While it may not change any opinions I have it has made me more informed on the subject
I choose to comment on Eva’s review of the article “After a Stillbirth, Tests Can Help Pinpoint the Cause.” Overall, the article and Eva’s review were very interesting and well-written. One thing I liked about Eva’s review was how she began by explaining how these tests are performed. She writes that scientists can use the placenta to find the cause of stillbirths. I also liked how she wrote how frequently these tests can determine the cause. By writing that they help find the cause in two thirds of cases, Eva makes her article less bias. She shows that even though these tests are very helpful, they still need improvement. Finally, I liked how she included specifics about the study completed to get these results. This gave the article and her review more credibility.
ReplyDeleteEven though the review was well-written overall, there were still areas that could have been improved. Although some of the facts and percentages were helpful, I believe she included too many. This made it very difficult to absorb this information and made it difficult to understand what was most important. I also wish that she had gone into more information on how this study will be helpful. She says that it can help parents during future pregnancies but does not explain how. This makes it difficult to understand the importance of the study.
Overall, the article and Eva’s review were extremely interesting. I choose to comment on this article because I know that stillbirths are a major cause of death throughout the country and the world. I would be interested in finding out how this study can really be implemented to decrease the number of stillbirths. Knowing exactly what the cause of death is could save many lives, and I would like to learn more about how this could be done. I also found it interesting that placental issues were one of the main causes of stillbirths, and I would be interesting in learning how this results in stillbirths.
ReplyDeleteSaint Louis, Catherine. "After a Stillbirth, Tests Can Help Pinpoint the Cause." The New York Times 9 Mar. 2017: Print.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/09/well/family/after-a-stillbirth-tests-can-help-pinpoint-the-cause.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fscience&action=click&contentCollection=science®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=2&pgtype=sectionfront
I read Eva Cagliostro’s review of “After a Stillbirth, Tests Can Help Pinpoint the Cause” and thought that she did a very good job. I particularly liked her summary of the article and its main points. She kept her summary short and concise, which summaries are supposed to be, yet still included enough information for the reader to understand what happened in the article. I also liked how she gave details and specific percents, especially when saying, “Complications during the birth process account for 30 percent of stillbirths, placental problems before labor make up 25 percent of the cases, genetic conditions/ birth defects are responsible for 14 percent, infection for 13 percent, and umbilical cord issues for 10 percent of cases. ”. These numbers helped provide the reader with more information on the large percentages regarding stillbirths. Finally, I think that Eva did a very good job explaining why stillbirths still occur, giving many examples. This extra detail was vital in her report and was very interesting to read about.
Although Eva did a very good job in her review, she could use some improvement. For example, Eva never used quotes. By adding quotes she would have been able to emphasize the validity of all that she was saying. This would have thoroughly improved her review. Lastly, I think that she should improve her second paragraph regarding the relevance of the entire topic by expanding on its importance. She did not give much of an explanation as to why it will help parents during future pregnancies. By adding this extra information, Eva could have really strengthened her review.
I thought that the review was written very well and Eva chose a great article to talk about. I think that the topic is very interesting and relevant and Eva has further educated me on the topic. I never knew about this topic before reading Eva’s review and now feel knowledgeable on this topic. Overall, I really enjoyed Eva’s review and learned a lot from it.
I read Eva’s review of the article"After a Stillbirth, Tests Can Help Pinpoint the Cause." I enjoyed reading her article for three reasons. The first reason is that she provided a very good summary of the article. The second reason is that she quoted the original article which added credibility to her summary. Finally, I enjoyed how she kept her review concise and did not include any useless information.
ReplyDeleteAlthough her review was well written, she could have improved two aspects of her review. The first was that she could have improved on her grammar, as this would have made the review much easier to read. In addition, she should have elaborated on the process of analyzing the placenta more, such as giving details that show what went wrong in the pregnancy.
After reading this article, it expanded my knowledge on why babies are born still, a topic that I had previously known nothing about.
In Eva’s review, she talks about how a new study indicates that studying the placenta can help determine the cause of stillbirth. Eva did a good job choosing an interesting article to review. When browsing through the different article reviews, this one’s title immediately caught my attention. Another thing she did well was summarizing the article in enough depth for the reader to understand. One last thing Eva did a great job on was on her critique of the article. She provided very specific things that the article lacked.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, Eva could’ve added more of her own opinion on the article because she didn’t add any of his own thoughts besides while critiquing the article’s writing. Additionally, I think Eva could’ve added a picture or chart to help the reader further believe the information from the article she read because she included a lot of statistics.
After reading Eva’s review, I have learned of a new way to determine the cause of devastating stillbirths. This is a great way for stillbirths to be avoided in the future by mothers avoiding certain things regarding their placenta. After I read the article title, I knew I had to read the review in order to learn more about the topic.
Louis, Catherine Saint. "After a Stillbirth, Tests Can Help Pinpoint the Cause." The New York
Times. The New York Times, 09 Mar. 2017. Web. 21 Mar. 2017.
.
Saint Louis, Catherine. "After a Stillbirth, Tests Can Help Pinpoint the Cause." The New York Times 9 Mar. 2017: Print. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/09/well/family/after-a-stillbirth-tests-can-help-pinpoint-the-cause.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fscience&action=click&contentCollection=science®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=2&pgtype=sectionfront
ReplyDeleteI read Eva’s review of the article “After a Stillbirth, Tests Can Help Pinpoint the Cause” by Catherine Saint Louis. Eva did a great job with her review, she included many facts and explained the issue. She explained how knowing why stillbirths occur we can prevent them in the future. I also enjoyed how she connected the stillbirths to society today.
Although she did a really great job, there were a few things that she could improve on. I wish that she had included some quotes from the article. This would have strengthened her review a bit more. I also wish that she went into more detail about how the scientists analyze the placenta.
Overall her review was very interesting and I enjoyed reading about it, I am already interested in this topic so reading about the new technology was fascinating.
Saint Louis, Catherine. "After a Stillbirth, Tests Can Help Pinpoint the Cause." The New York Times 9 Mar. 2017: Print.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/09/well/family/after-a-stillbirth-tests-can-help-pinpoint-the-cause.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fscience&action=click&contentCollection=science®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=2&pgtype=sectionfront
Eva’s review of the article "After a Stillbirth, Tests Can Help Pinpoint the Cause." was very well done. Her summary was clear and concise, while still providing a depth of information about this topic. She also did a great job expressing her own opinion and critique of the article. Her well articulated stance showed she really absorbed the information and considered the authors work. Finally, I thought Eva did an exemplary job including data points that helped the reader understand the information. She said, “Complications during the birth process account for 30 percent of stillbirths, placental problems before labor make up 25 percent of the cases, genetic conditions/ birth defects are responsible for 14 percent, infection for 13 percent, and umbilical cord issues for 10 percent of cases.”
Overall Eva did a good job, but she still could improve a few areas. For example, she could have used a couple more direct quotes from the article. This would give her readers a better sense of the author's voice and add some additional credibility. Also, she could have expanded on the process of analyzing the placenta.
I was very interested in Eva’s review and the article she cited. I had knowledge about this topic before, but it was interesting to learn more about the improvements coming up in this field.