Authors take issue with commentary on their paper

doi:10.1136/bmj.320.7236.713/b

BMJ 2000;320:713 ( 11 March )

Letters

Authors take issue with commentary on their paper

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

EDITOR $---$ We commend the development of the BMJ's guidelines on educational interventions, which were used to assess our paper.¹At several points in Ker's commentary on our paper, however, sheraises the need for further information. We recognised this needwhen we prepared the manuscript. We were also aware, though, ofthe constraints on space; articles in the BMJ should not exceed2000 words, and providing the requisite information would havemade our paper substantially longer. An alternative would havebeen to give the information on the journal's website; this hasthe disadvantage of increasing the demands on authors but shouldbe considered if the guidelines are to be fullyapplied.

We had some difficulty in following the comments on the randomisation approach. Firstly, it is unclear why Ker thinks theterm "controlled" should be dropped; this is the conventionalterm for a trial such as this one, entailing . . . [Full text of this article]

CiteULike

Complore

Connotea

Del.icio.us Add to Digg

Digg

StumbleUpon Add to Technorati

Technorati What's this?

Relevant Article

Evaluation of the effectiveness of an educational intervention for general practitioners in adolescent health care: randomised controlled trial • Commentary: Applying the BMJ's guidelines on educational interventions: L A Sanci, C M M Coffey, F C M Veit, M Carr-Gregg, G C Patton, N Day, G Bowes, and Jean Ker
BMJ 2000 320: 224-230. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]