ArticleJournal of community health2008
The medical exclusion of an immigrant to the United States of America in the early twentieth century. The case of Cristina Imparato.
Article in Journal of community health, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The medical inspection of immigrants arriving in the United States in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries was framed by a need to rapidly process large numbers of people. Scientific medicine, such as it was then, was subordinate to the existing immigration laws which reflected the influences of the powerful anti-immigration forces of eugenics and nativism. The line, or single-file queues in which immigrants were arranged, facilitated rapid processing. The split-second medical gaze was hailed by the then leadership of the U.S. Public Health Service as scientifically sound, based as it was on the alleged exceptional disease detection skills of examining public health physicians. In reality, this system was seriously flawed, led to numerous diagnostic errors, and was free of any form of public outcomes assessment or accountability. In time, trachoma became the principal focus of line physicians because of the belief that it could be easily detected, and those diagnosed with it summarily deported. However, the diagnosis of the early stages of this disease is far more complex since it must be differentiated from other forms of benign conjunctivitis. Described here is the case of Cristina Imparato, a 46-year-old immigrant who arrived in New York from Italy on September 27, 1910, and who was given a diagnosis of trachoma which resulted in her summary deportation three days later on September 30, 1910. Her case serves to illustrate the complex forces at work at that time around the issue of immigration. These included a need to meet the labor needs of expanding industries while responding to the immigration restriction demands of eugenics supporters and nativists and the call to protect the country from imported disease threats.
Indexed as
Identifiers
18389350What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.