Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2006;333 (14 October), doi:10.1136/bmj.333.7572.0-f
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
There are some lively discussions on bmj.com. One that makes it on to this week's letters pages is about whether it's ever OK to assume that an intervention is effective based on observational studies alone. Are there times in medicine when we should act without waiting for randomised trials? Malcolm Potts and colleagues argued that there were (30 September, p 701), citing oral rehydration therapy, circumcision to prevent HIV infection, and misoprostol for postpartum haemorrhage. Some responders accepted aspects of their argument, but most expressed a mixture of outrage and scorn (p 807). What about adverse effects? Why should people in the developing world be treated on a lesser standard of evidence? Richard Lehman concludes in his journal blog on bmj.com, "This article is so bad it may actually do some good." Presumably the potential good lies in getting us to think about what we
Fiona Godlee, editor
(fgodlee@bmj.com)
Read all Rapid Responses